/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11617722
>Previous thread not linked due to politics derail.
lol

the thread before last
>>11611528

>>11617722
Man, the outer system is stupid cheap to get to. Titan landers and low orbits around gas giants aren't much more delta-V than a Mars lander. I guess they're just less popular because of the travel time, orbital windows, etc.

>>11617754
A lot of it is also because prospecting missions are easier to fund and Mars is a realistic target this century while the outers are a long way off unless there is a revolutionary discovery.

kek

>>11617777
Is that just a SN5 ring? So long as it didn't land on something important it shouldn't be a big deal.

H-he can't k-keep getting away with it, b-bros.

>>11617790
This shit really shows how far removed markets are from reality.
At current production rates how many decades would it take for Tesla to produce their marketcap worth of cars?

>>11617811
You are forgetting the Mars market.
What do you think the cybertruck was for?

>>11617811
>At current production rates how many decades would it take for Tesla to produce their marketcap worth of cars?
That isn't a useful metric. Tesla's share price is so high because the market is pricing in their electric vehicle lead, among other things, and their potential in the coming trillion dollar plus robotaxi industry which will be far bigger than the current vehicle production industry. You can believe that current shareholders are wrong about the potential of the company but their belief isn't so far removed from reality. Other automakers may produce more cars, but that's like comparing horse drawn wagons to automobiles since they are mostly not electric. Car ownership is set to rapidly decline, if you think that Tesla is just a car company, you'll never understand it.

>>11617854
>Car ownership is set to rapidly decline
Maybe in cities with high enough population densities but how many people own cars there now?
Where I live the population density is far too low for ride share self-driving to get me from A to B without plenty of waiting at each end.

Now if they actually get that prime mover they were playing with years ago on the market that will actually be huge as freight is a huge industry and short trips between other forms of transport (docks / railyard) are very common.

>>11617874
>Maybe in cities with high enough population densities but how many people own cars there now?
In the US? Most of them. The challenge isn't just in-town robotaxis, but rideshare programs that make it affordable to forego cars for out of town travel. One weekend trip a month on Zipcar is $400. At that point owning a car is more economical.

>>11617876
>In the US? Most of them
I did not know this, makes a lot more sense now.

Oh no no no

Those anons who said they were building their own rocket. I knew you were going to fail because /sci/ is dunning-krueger: the board. However I still support your projects. My suggestions are to just buy solid motors or if you are really dead set on making a liquid engine, stick to pressure-fed. I sure hope nobody here seriously thought they could make a turbopump?

>>11617913
Didn't the starship fuel tank crumple completely?

>>11617913
And that's why you cryo-pop scrap tanks until mexicans weld them right.

>>11617916
R-Candy solids are great fun if you want to make your own.
Source http://www.nakka-rocketry.net/
As for liquid I still want to try it for shits and giggles but it'll be awhile until I can afford machine tools for the work.

>>11617913
Please let SLS cato on the pad first time out, please.

>>11617874
>Maybe in cities with high enough population densities but how many people own cars there now?
That also isn't that useful. Robotaxis can replace most of public transportation. The cost per mile can easily reach under a dollar, even cheaper with carpooling. I would rather have to share a car with three other strangers and make three extra stops than to ride a bus and make dozens of stops and then still have to walk minutes to my destination since it didn't drop me off right outside of it. There will be so many robo taxis moving through cities that car pooling will become very efficient and the public transportation monopolies won't be able to compete outside of subways and light rail.
>Where I live the population density is far too low for ride share self-driving to get me from A to B without plenty of waiting at each end.
You still would have only two real choices, buy an electric vehicle or use an electric robo taxi. Electric vehicles are inherently cheaper to own, they offer better performance, and their prices are rapidly falling. It's not a question of if they will replace ICE vehicles but when. Not to mention that various governments have already set dates for when they are going to flat out ban them.

Tesla is the only company that has very good autonomous driving potential and actually produces their own cars. They can pass the risk of self driving onto their vehicle owners through autopilot and have them supervise it until it gets good enough that they won't have to. Companies like Waymo not only take full liability, they have to retrofit vehicles and they use LIDAR which is much more expensive than just using cameras, radar, and ultrasonic. Some company is going to have a first mover advantage in robo taxis and take a lot of the market. It's likely going to be a company like Tesla which can apply updates to their existing fleet and have millions of them overnight.

>>11617913
>Eric confirmed for being an ignorant retard who’s never watched a Shuttle or Delta 4 launch

Hydrogen leaking is literally a hallmark of rockets with big orange tanks, such leaks occur semi-regularly and have never lead to a loss of vehicle.

>>11617790
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/29/elon-musk-tweets-protest-against-us-coronavirus-lockdown
>Despite the closure, Telsa’s share price has recovered nearly all of the slump caused by the coronavirus outbreak. The rebound in the shares to $769 on Tuesday, from a low of $361 on 18 March, puts Musk close to achieving a $720m payday.

>The rally in the share price puts Tesla’s market capitalisation at $141bn; the company has reached a six-month average valuation of $96bn. If the market cap achieves a six-month average of $100bn it would trigger the vesting of the first of 12 tranches of share options granted to Musk.

>Each tranche gives Musk the option to buy 1.69m Tesla shares at $350.02 each. If Musk sold those shares at Tuesday’s closing price of $769 he could make a profit of about $750m.

>>11618001
>the stock market isn’t completely detached from reality

>>11618007
The stock market isn’t completely detached from reality.

>>11618007
it is, my point is that there are reasons for that...

>>11617722
>Ganymede
>Gaymade

>>11617916
/sci/ should build a ufo instead, we can copy the navy's patent
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10322827B2/en?inventor=Salvatore+Pais&oq=inventor:(Salvatore+Pais)

>>11618023
Callisto is the best moon of Jupiter. Easy to colonize.

>>11617957
Then what the hell is holding NASA back? The test isn't that complicated.

>>11618095
>Then what the hell is holding NASA back?

Green Run work at Stennis has been halted for weeks due to Coronavirus in Louisiana, nothing to do with SLS itself. Boeing were making decent progress according to NSF but NASA halted all work when somebody at Stennis caught the virus.

moon and mars goldrushes when

>>11617754
Mars lander can aerobrake
you don't need that 1440 or the 3800 m/s to go down

>>11617916
>liquid engine
dumbass, they're making a pressure fed gas decomposition monoprop

>>11617925
why buy machine tools for one project? You won't even know how to use them. Just send your plans to a machining company.

>>11617945
why not just use a train?
>>11618080
patents doesn't mean something works

>>11618204
Because I want to get into machining as a hobby, I want to make steam engines and graduate to ICEs over time.

I feel like my Youtube recommendations are trying to tell me something.

>>11618235
>having heros
He seems a little old to only be dealing with this last year.

>>11617921
SN4 passed pressure tests at both ambient and cryogenic temperatures.

>>11618133
>Boeing were making decent progress according to NSF
[X] doubt

>>11618263
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/04/workplace-closures-sls-good-progress-opening-missions/

It’s literally the name of the article...

>>11618261
But at pitiful pressures. It doesn't really matter anyway as the two aren't very comparable - they can make and destroy as many SS tanks as they like, SLS failures are actual setbacks

>>11618133
The whole economy shutdown is so stupid imo. Let people work, continue to work. We have old people dying cause all the young workers abandoned them in fear. The ones that need to worry are not young people, but fucking old people. The media has driven fear to everyone by not identifying where the weak points are. This created the panic that led to unnecessary deaths of people. All they have to do is say, "everyone under 40 should work normally", everyone interacting with old people must fucking wear mask/keep social distance, pay attention to the healths of older people, etc. The ones dying are the old fucks and they need the most help, instead youngins are in the state of fear because of media's perceptual propaganda.

>>11618222
Fair enough. Start with hand tools. learn to cut and bend sheet metal with a hacksaw and vice and take it from there.

>>11618281
You're mostly right that the media has overstated the risk to people our age but the main problem is overloading hospitals which happens even thought the death rate is low

>>11618133
>Green Run work at Stennis has been halted for weeks due to Coronavirus in Louisiana, nothing to do with SLS itself.
Bullshit! The core was at Stennis for months before the Coronavirus even left China.

>>11618294
The bigger problem is when economy shuts down for long periods, it can cripple the nation state's defense, it can overload our minimally kept supply chains, it can create chaos/panic, collapse of the society itself.

>>11618290
I have 20 years in construction so I'm pretty good with hand tools / fabrication. Started blacksmithing a few months ago and want to try casting too.

>>11618210
>why not just use a train?
For the same reason why trains haven't replaced buses, most people need to go to a more specific destination than what trains offer and it's not economical for trains to service those areas. Robo-taxis are even more economical than buses and will be able to service almost anywhere. They don't need bus stops or transfer stations. They don't have to run trips without any passengers just in case there is someone waiting at a stop. Passengers will pay more to ride in an empty robo-taxi and to get to their destination faster but they cannot do that with a bus service.

>>11618332
>Passengers will pay more to ride in an empty robo-taxi and to get to their destination faster but they cannot do that with a bus service.
The closest equivalent to that is corporate shuttles.

>>11617916
My liquid monoprop "engine" was just meant to be a test rig, but I ran into budget problems early on. Also the design itself is pretty bad. With my Trumpbux I might buy some new engine parts along with plumbing provided I can find a remotely controlled valve that's rated for nitrous oxide.

>>11617925
>As for liquid I still want to try it for shits and giggles but it'll be awhile until I can afford machine tools for the work.
If you're fine with an engine that would be too heavy for flight and relies on itself being a massive heat sink to keep it from melting, then I still think repurposed piping can do.

>>11618317
I'm on neetbux so I don't really care
>>11618332
>Passengers will pay more to ride in an empty robo-taxi and to get to their destination faster
No. Public transport users want it to be cheap as possible, those who don't buy their own car.

>the NSF emdrive threads are still going
It's like a continuous six year train wreck.

>>11618336
The closest equivalent is an uber, but you'd be able to undercut the uber and provide more confidence to the customer. Plus millennials would pay a premium just to not deal with a human being

>>11618343
>NSF is still banging on a meme that even /sci/ went stale on
so much for muh high quality

>>11618338
Why monopropellant? Those fuels are too expensive or restricted. Just use ethanol and some low grade oxidiser like they did in the 30s

>>11618343
>EMdrive
Didn't that turn out to be false measurments?

>>11618343
>>11618349
What I hate about EMdrive is that the people defending it just went silent instead of officially admitting it was bullshit.

>>11618352
Not him but monoprop saves a lot of hassle if it'll catalyze on a mesh and something NO2 is cheap (for an oxidizer) and plentyful (car use).

>>11618352
Nitrous oxide isn't heavily restricted (if you're okay with it having a small amount of neurotoxin mixed in), and is self pressurizing. That second point is very important as it significantly simplifies the design of the entire system.

>>11618349
>you'd be able to undercut the uber
This is reason alone why this idea won't work. Even Uber has barely survived in many cities with established local taxi companies. A system where the drivers displaced by it can't even just start working for it would never be allowed

>>11618368
>never
Big word there anon, while there will be resistance it'll collapse eventually.

>>11618357
>What I hate about EMdrive is that the people defending it just went silent instead of officially admitting it was bullshit.
Oh no, it's so much worse than that. NSF user TheTraveller is still in full throated defense mode on NSF and pushing $20,000 "validation kits.". Honk honk.

>>11618354
Nobody has ever reproduced a thrust that was distinguishable from experimental error. Unfortunately, the only known perpetual motion machine is the human quest to build a perpetual motion machine.

>>11618368
>allowed
They'll do to Uber what Uber did to the taxi companies and just show up anyways. Uber and Lyft will scream but by the time litigation progresses they'll be bankrupt.

>>11618364
Will it catalyze on magnesium pellets?

>>11618343
>six years of retarded fucking boomers

>>11618380
IIRC silver works but don't quote me on that.

>>11618342
You don't understand the size of the potential robo-taxi market and we're not just talking about people who would otherwise just take public transportation. Robo-taxis can charge 1/4th the cost per mile of a taxi or Uber and still be profitable, and that's before ride sharing which would make it even cheaper. Millions, if not billions, of people wouldn't drive enough to warrant the cost of owning a car and would instead use robo-taxis.

>>11618364
>>11618365
>Nitrous oxide fuel blends testing continued throughout World War II. The promise of high performance, greater range and lighter feed systems drove experimentation with blends of nitrous oxide and ammonia, which resulted in numerous explosions and demolished motors.[2] The complexities involved in building propulsion systems that can safely handle nitrous oxide fuel blend monopropellants have been a deterrent to serious development.
Yeah you're not going to get anywhere with this. Just use peroxide and kerosene.

>>11618210
Ya no shit doesn't work, I'm suggesting a 4chan board build something the US government can't even build do you really have so little brain cells you thought it was a serious proposal?

>>11618368
> Even Uber has barely survived in many cities
And the global impact of that is essentially nill. "You can't go down that road, the last guy that did stubbed his toe"

>>11618400
anon please read
he's not talking about mixing a fuel and an oxidizer together to make a monoprop, he's talking about passing nitrous over a catalyst bed (causing it to decompose) and using that as a monopropelllant

>>11618400
>anon accidentally solves age-old problem in rocketry

>>11618400
We aren't talking about blended monoprop and your solution is just buy High Test Peroxide which it highly controlled, highly explosive and will decompose into 600c oxygen on contact with just about any organic.
Instead of reading wikipedia and claiming to know better why not do some research and find why 2 different people came to the same conclusion.

>>11618392
Silver does work, but I'm too poor.

>>11618400
I'm not planning on going anywhere with it, just something functional enough to be considered a rocket engine to test run.

>peroxide
That's fairly dangerous to handle.

>>11618418
Silver pellets are surprisingly cheap if you can be bothered electroplating it onto a mesh.

>>11618373
>>11618375
This is different because people will be out of a job permanently. We still don't have self driving trains for this reason.
>>11618398
1) a bus will still be cheaper
2) if you ever left your room you'd know that the world is anti-car right now. Telling everyone to take the taxi instead of a bus is never gonna happen in today's political climate.
3) The people who drive because they hate public transport will still see this as public transport and not use it

I don't think robo taxis are a bad idea but I think you are vastly overestimating the future uptake of it.

>>11618414
>age old problem
you mean "classic bad idea"
it's not a solvable problem, turning your fuel tank into a bomb and then lighting one end of it is not a viable approach to rocketry
you need to limit the bomb-making to the combustion chamber

>>11618429
It was just banter m8

>>11618427
>We still don't have self driving trains for this reason.
That's going to change soon if human error keeps being the primary cause of train crashes.

>>11618427
>We still don't have self driving trains for this reason.
Vancouver has self driving trains.

>>11618429
>it's not a solvable problem, turning your fuel tank into a bomb and then lighting one end of it is not a viable approach to rocketry
I believe ACME did some testing on that once.

>>11618434
We have already reached the point some airlines require their pilots to explain why they disengaged the auto-pilot.

>>11618410
>>11618416
Okay and what catalyst are you going to use? Last I checked catalysts are expensive.

>>11618444
catalysts aren't hard to make
I was going to recommend he use a blowtorch to heat up his steel to 700 C or so

>>11618434
What happens now is the train is basically self-driving but they still have the driver there to do nothing so the cost doesn't actually go down.

>>11618451
>but they still have the driver there to do nothing so the cost doesn't actually go down.
Until the driver literally falls asleep and the train leaps into a crowded airport terminal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Hare_station_train_crash

>>11618448
Steel is a shit catalyst.

>>11618453
Lol this is some Die-Hard shit.

>>11618422
https://nanovactech.com/products/silver-pellets-ag?variant=10736468787257
Doesn't seem too cheap. Unless I found the wrong store?

>if you can be bothered electroplating it onto a mesh.
I was thinking about just using the pellets in the decomposition chamber with a high temperature filter right before the contraction section.

>>11618444
>Okay and what catalyst are you going to use?
Magnezium oxide pellets seem cheaper, but I can't guarantee that it'll work as a catalyst.

>>11618453
>Determined that the cause of the crash was not related to entry speed
>Changed entry speeds, did nothing to address the actual cause
ahh. classic.

>>11618464
The actual cause of the crash was hiring fat, dumb, lazy black women to do half of all the city government jobs, but Chicago will never ever admit that.

>>11618444
Sorry anon, I was a bit of a cunt.
When looking at what governments have used in the past keep in mind we don't have that money or free access to anything we want.
A NO2 motor has terrible ISP and if you regeneratively cool to get an engine life measured in more than seconds they start to have terrible thrust to weight.
The advantage is everything is cheaper and easier.

>>11618461
While not evenly shaped / sized they are much cheaper.
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Silver-metal-element-47-Ag-shiny-pellets-3-grams-99-99-in-labeled-glass-vial/231869365500?_trkparms=ispr%3D1&hash=item35fc7dbcfc:g:CsYAAOSwGtRXyqlT&enc=AQAEAAACcIQvEcHUrT7nmUC3yY5qbPyaBN1nJEDYW8MyypsJPgXKprB7XQ6kzQrRwmk40BQLKEGM5hRAAtmAAUMfT8E5Oc3Gqsbhv2yXBm%2Bjx1dn46KRCYmt%2FI710cCxMbsZslvwo7Oq%2Bh7J5pFdo0ObQ8KexUO7f%2F7Rj0NtIktLaNpQF0CiajkR%2FOFFX9nDtUanOHyv6Ay9fvPu6PohfJdklAjLxpIjkYO5YXjc5uj0edRg4QTyAB%2BKUEBmtymbEkn1kvL2b3CywqyzuFbyFMevaXIuUjOc2RkVeing%2B0n4j3PeIcVWPU1l50r3tQA7%2BRfpxILXh%2B0xwg8VYsjUF8iRIo6O4LAyOOGdVpgndCq4w932YNjhq8fZ7%2FHL0SqPnk16%2FYUY7FaM1fDjwNdHp4v4R5fBfCclWy0LqxXVaSWpUgjIPr3BYrarjuCLSQ9LkxOuQtTMyOUWYHnOVnWX3zVp%2B8mHA0riKWQE8pCSZJBS5%2BfJzjPiWn1cTee1zoLtF4P1TgbAjAfG7Efz2Vrg46gXKoPji4RjF8jQy9bnYr1JWKPMFO%2BOix3rYKKYfs12Dt%2FPyIG0ly%2F%2Fv2abJZ5w46qUfAkUNXvF%2Bpac8hVTF9fjMLagB%2FNpZyLJT%2FooUK9tYmfp5b2QYioV%2F1lFTgmlic%2FxsrhLnqGNppqC%2FbmbUZYKZIU7TbdGVW1RBMx6OKkybNegLvJEVahabSHvTMJhomkzlKk40UtllhJDSd2s93Q6jy%2BInk0h0VvID55OVZh0laPthcOTolg%2F4sCLfz7ZzIULMnSmIL1dUhphjcaJ12fg0zfUuIXySRSFYqB5n1RS8JG%2FQIiX9Q%3D%3D&checksum=23186936550004ada826f6ac4d88b48aeacde80dcb40

>>11618281
This post is probably trolling, but there are plenty of young people who got the virus, didn't die, but needed to be hospitalized.
>>11618133
>Boeing were making decent progress
Not according to GAO.

>>11618470
>a white person has never crashed a train
>>11618476
it's okay. I believe Lox isn't that expensive and Goddard, a private citizen used it. He didn't get too much funding from his university because they thought he was a kook. Not sure on how easy it is to handle though.

>>11618476
Jesus Christ, that url. Also that's more expensive per gram than the previous link. Although there's a 5 gram sample that's cheaper than the 3 gram sample, so idk what's going on with the pricing.

>>11618427
There are plenty of self-driving trains.
>1) a bus will still be cheaper
Only on long trips. The operating costs per passenger mile of buses is almost a dollar, which is what Tesla suggested they were going to charge for single passenger robo-taxis. A lot of bus routes are already uneconomical and only exist because of governments subsiding them. Robo-taxis would draw customers away from buses and further reduce the amount of profitable bus service routes. They would start to lose their subsidies and even profitable routes with full buses would still have completion from autonomous shuttle vans.
>that the world is anti-car right now
Yet that hasn't stopped people from owing cars. It's the emissions of car ownership that has been the sticking point. Electric vehicles produce a fraction of the emissions of ICE vehicles, they're not going to be treated the same way. Currently dozens of governments actually pay people money to buy electric cars. It's not that much better for the environment to take an electric bus over an electric car, no one is going to make it their hill to die on.
>The people who drive because they hate public transport will still see this as public transport and not use it
Except they won't because it's more like a taxi than anything, which people from all walks of life take, and they don't have to share it with other passengers so it will have none of the public transportation baggage.

>>11618489
>Goddard, a private citizen
In a time when dynamite was over the counter and you could buy a tommy gun for shits and giggles, times change.

>>11618492
Yeah, sorry about the link. As for the pricing I think a few grams should do the job if you plate something that can take the heat.

>>11618494
>The operating costs per passenger mile of buses is almost a dollar,
But you have bus passes where you can ride all day for a small amount
>A lot of bus routes are already uneconomical and only exist because of governments subsiding them
This is true but if the bus is uneconomical it's because of low passenger volume meaning that a taxi won't fare much better
>It's the emissions of car ownership that has been the sticking point.
True. I still don't see why multiple cars is more energy efficient than one bus though
>they don't have to share it with other passengers so it will have none of the public transportation baggage.
Some of the baggage comes from the simple fact that you don't own it or even have full control over it. Idk I'm not a drive, go to /o/ and they'll explain exactly why they would never ditch their car for a taxi.

>>11618497
Lox and kerosene is still not restricted as far as I know. I personally think anon should just use a solid motor. Lots of info on them, they're widely available and super easy to set up and use

>>11618489
>Not sure on how easy it is to handle though.
Not that anon, but I had some liquid oxygen handling training and it's not really easy to handle. Everything that'll come into contact with LOx must be special rated for it. You're scared that something organic will get in the line and cause a burst. And the training videos love to show the worst case gore scenarios.

At least it's easier to handle than peroxide. I once asked a retired aerospace engineer about the dangers of handling hydrogen peroxide and he looked like he just had a Vietnam flashback.

>>11618497
>Yeah, sorry about the link. As for the pricing I think a few grams should do the job if you plate something that can take the heat.
You think so? Because most of the to-scale drawings of monoprop engines have the catalyst bed take up a significant volume of the engine. Pic related, even though it's a completely different engine. Although electroplating seems feasible to do on a small budget. Could get steel chicken wire and plate it with some "cheap" silver. Thanks for the idea.

>>11618494
Basically I think it's a good idea but I don't think it will replace buses especially in urban areas and even human taxis is doubtful because of protectionism.

>>11618506
I have made several solids, I'm one of the guys want want to do NO2 monoprop.
Kero/LOX needs to be feed into the combustion chamber at above opperating pressure, that is hard and expensive ignoring the boiloff, embrittlement and handeling issues that come with cryo.

>>11617722
Does this mean that I can throw together a cheap calculation to derive payload to TLI from payload to LEO multiplying it by the ratio (3260/9400)?

>>11618511
>I once asked a retired aerospace engineer about the dangers of handling hydrogen peroxide and he looked like he just had a Vietnam flashback.
Kek.

>>11618512
Why wouldn't it replace busses, cities would love nothing more than get rid of bussdrivers and taxis are pretty much already replaced by uber and others and even if you argue that third parties like that would be banned then taxi drivers would simply use bot cars themselves.

>>11618516
or maybe it would be 3260/(3260+9400)

or maybe I should quit while I'm ahead

>>11618525
TLI = LEO * ( 3260 / ( 3260+9400 ) )

>>11618511
Honestly I would expect nitrious oxide to decompose thermally once exposed to the heat created by the catalyst. I suspect actual thrusters are drastically over engineered but I could be completely wrong.

>>11618513
Okay well let's move on from arguing over the propellant choice. So you're using NO2. How are you going to manufacture the nozzle/combustion chamber? Cast it? I have a feeling that it's going to be a little trickier than casting plain steel because of the temperatures and pressures. Also a major problem I always have is that casters/moulders don't do one-offs. You have to pay thousands for the blank to be prepared, then the casts from that are cheap, but only if you cast a lot How are you going to cool it? Ablatively is the only viable option but what are you going to use?

>>11618513
>I'm one of the guys want want to do NO2 monoprop.
It was fun to exchange notes too. I hope you get around to making yours and that it works.

>>11618528
>Honestly I would expect nitrious oxide to decompose thermally once exposed to the heat created by the catalyst.
That's what I'm expecting too, and my older design was made around that assumption. It used just a electrically heated nichrome wire taped on the inside of the chamber to start the engine. However, I explained this idea to a propulsion engineer and he expressed heavy doubts that it might not work.

>>11618518
1 car per bus passenger is way more traffic and I'm 99% sure there is no way this can be more energy efficient.

>>11618527
That was my third guess

>>11618543
You need to test it first before dumping money into the engine

>>11618548
you do know bots can also drive busses right?

>>11618542
>How are you going to manufacture the nozzle/combustion chamber?
I'm the other nitrous thuster anon, I'm going to use high pressure stainless steel threaded pipes that are sealed with car engine gasket sealant. The hard part is figuring out how to mount the engine to something without having to weld something to it.

As I said many posts ago I'm looking for a lathe, the engine would be a nozzle circlipped to the combustion chamber with the injector plate circlipped to the other end.
This design would have a very short opperation life but it it worked I would enclose the combustion chamber for regenative cooling and switch to a graphite nozzle to avoid the complex manufacture of a regenativly cooled throat.

>>11618570
Meant for >>11618542

>>11618543
I could see a single wire causing issues but a mesh should work. Best of luck anon.

>>11618543
>an engineer said he didn't think it would work, that's why I didn't even try
go for it pussy
worst case scenario you need to heat your combustion chamber with a torch before firing it

>>11618505
>But you have bus passes where you can ride all day for a small amount
No one does that. Very few people take public transportation unless they have to because it's terrible in most places, if it exists at all. The fares that they charge reflects their operating costs which will be higher than robo-taxis. The cost of their bus pass also reflects how much they are being used. The only situations where your single fare will be cheaper is if you only take longer routes. The only situation where your bus pass will be cheaper is if you use it more than the average person who also has one. This won't be the case for most people.
>if the bus is uneconomical it's because of low passenger volume meaning that a taxi won't fare much better
Robo-taxis would be a lot better in that situation because they only operate when they are needed and it's much more inefficient to send a bus to pick up a few passengers than to send a car.
>Some of the baggage comes from the simple fact that you don't own it or even have full control over it
That's a selling point, a lot of people would choose not to own a car if given a good alternative. If car ownership isn't cheaper than a robo-taxi, why would you want to do it? You have to deal with costly repairs, insurance payments, going to the DMV, paying for parking, and the list goes on.
>go to /o/
I go there all the time and they don't reflect most people.
>>11618512
Protectionism quickly fails when the alternative service is much cheaper and the public demands to use it. Look at what happened with Uber which is now allowed in most cities despite the efforts of the taxi industry. The cost difference between a robo-taxi and a human taxi is so great it's only a matter of time until lobbying against fails. Very few politicians would want to risk angering the public to appease human drivers.

>>11618570
>if I dunk it in a bucket that counts as regenerative cooling

>>11618582
So this may work in rural areas where as you pointed out the bus service is shit but in urban areas with established public transport, no, not at all, it would just create more traffic and actually be less energy efficient.
> If car ownership isn't cheaper than a robo-taxi
You gave a quote of $1 per mile, a car costs 10 cents per mile to operate in the USA. And don't give me maintenance and insurance costs because they will add up for the robocalls taxi too and even if they didn't they won't account for the 10x difference in cost.

What an aesthetic rocket...

>>11618575
>I could see a single wire causing issues but a mesh should work. Best of luck anon.
Thanks!

>>11618578
I might give it a shot if I can find a good remotely controlled valve.

>>11618592
IIRC early Soviet engines didn't have channels for regen cooling. Their engines were covered by a shroud that encased the regen cooling like one big channel. It was abandoned because the tolerancing required was too difficult to manage.

>>11618609
What CAD do they use in Russia?

>>11618609
Nice iOS filename.

>>11618615
Cyka NX '22

>>11618608
>So this may work in rural areas where as you pointed out the bus service is shit but in urban areas with established public transport
What? We've been over this and you just ignored everything I said. In urban areas, robo-taxis will be cheaper per mile compared to public transportation and car ownership under a certain amount of miles traveled each year. In rural areas car ownership would still make sense for most of the population because of the travel distances involved which would mean very high robotaxi fares.
>You gave a quote of $1 per mile, a car costs 10 cents per mile to operate in the USA
That was the fare, not the operating cost or cost per driving mile. Their costs are a fraction of that amount and it includes insurance and maintenance. Instead of just responding because you don't want to admit that you made a terrible argument, actually think about this. The cost per mile wouldn't go up ten times because Tesla has decided to use their own cars for a robo-taxi, rather than just have a customer buy it and drive it themselves. They would both pay around the same amount to operate the car, if not Tesla paying substantially less because they can give a discount to themselves on serving, leasing, and insurance.

>new shenzhou spacecraft weighs 11 tons and carries 10 tons of fuel
>its designed to land people on the moon
>test flight is soon
space race 2.0 here we go

>>11618708
ah shit
please clarify those numbers
is that 11 ton dry mass or 11 ton wet mass with 10 tons of propellant

>>11618708
>21 tons to get man to the moon
You sure it isn't 21 kilotons?

>>11618708
>>11618715
Ar k so that is just the CSM and lander, not the launch vehicle.

>https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR4200/RR4251/RAND_RR4251.pdf
Edited the Rand study's chart to date.

>carries a crew of six
>reusable
>lands on land like soyuz
https://spacenews.com/long-march-5b-rolled-out-for-crewed-spacecraft-space-station-test-launch/

>>11618713
thats all it says

>>11618724
why isnt sls listed?

>>11618724
what's the Chasm mean

>>11618724
Superheavy and Starship is in the prototype stage? A Starship prototype hasn't been completely built yet much less done a test flight. Unless you're counting Starhopper?

>>11618733
They know it's never actually going to exist.

>>11618724
>New Glenn, Vulcan and OmegA
>in completion
excuse me

>>11618736
>A Starship prototype hasn't been completely built yet much less done a test flight.
SN4 will do a 150m hop in May.

>>11618736
maybe when it hits the end of that section it gets what the section is named after
so for example, not a single one of the rockets in "Completion" are complete
>>11618724
Falcon Heavy just won a competition to deliver payload to the Gateway

>>11618734
Means new thing that hasn't become standard yet, but is in the process. Sorta like how electric cars are at a chasm right now, almost ready to takeover the mainstream but not yet because still relatively "new" to consumers.

>>11618742
SN4 is going to explode pointlessly when they fuck up the short test hop and then SN5 will do the hop at the end of May

>>11618742
I know, but I personally wouldn't call it a prototype until it's doing actual flight tests. Then again, I'm pessimistic about new things in space flight because I'm tired of napkin drawings being taken seriously.

>>11618736
They're prototyping already, they've had multiple prototypes. SN4 is doing 150m once/if static fire of (1) raptor engine goes as planned. Then SN5 will have (3) raptor engine and do even higher altitude tests. They're right in the middle of prototype stage now.

>>11618752
>I personally wouldn't call it a prototype until it's doing actual flight tests
Prototype stage = hardware/software preliminary testing phase. Concept = paper stage. Starship is well past paper stage. Its not into production run yet. So what's let is prototype stage. Yes, prototypes can fail, that's the whole point of prototype phase. Its to find out whether they can do a viable product as fast as they can with minimal requirements.

>>11618708
Useless without a super heavy launch vehicle.

>>11618715
>21 kiloton to moon
>21,000 ton to moon
>Starship fully refuel can only do ~150 ton

I don't think we're there yet with 21 kiloton to moon yet.

>>11618765
I though he was talking about the full stack on the pad.

Also, another Starlink launch coming next week from now.

>>11618765
I think it's feasible with an Orion drive, but Orion drive for anything but interstellar missions is a mistake on account of the magnetosphere reacting poorly to nukes

>>11618760
It's probably likely the moon missions will be consisted of flag planting and fucking off, so I guess the Falcon Heavy and Crew Dragon will be used to carry a lander to the moon and land there.

>>11618757
You have a fair point. I guess I jumped the gun abit.

>>11618733
Because it’s listing only commercial launchers, not purely government ventures.

>>11618740
The first Vulcan is nearing completion, OmegA is being built and New Glenn is for most part a complete unknown, but generally considered lagging the others.

>>11618782
>Because it’s listing only commercial launchers
>implying comms companies won't be fighting for a ride at the low cost of two billion dollars

>>11618801
In-Q-Tel might.

the old thread is finally on page 10
you didn't need to make a new thread until now
SpaceX have a patch/logo/seal for Starship dev ops, I want to see it

Could magma in other planets be a different color? Like how fire is different depending on the gas it burns, would magma from an alien planet be a different color or is it really orange by nature?

>>11618818
Magma color is derived from temperature, so that would be your factor. A planet with white magma would be terrifyingly hot.

>>11618824
so what would be the different color possibilities?

>>11617766
I think Mars to Outer moons missions will happen just to see if there's life in Europa or wherever.

If there's a halfway decent base camp in Mars it would be logistically pretty simple to send a group of scientists a little bit further to go drill through some ice caps.

>>11618826
>>11618826

>>11618833
>logistically pretty simple
delta-V wise sure, but that's still a lot of time in very small tin cans.

>>11618840
Yeah.

I guess the real question is whether to launch from Mars and slightly easier logistics but a higher chance of cabin fever, or go direct from earth, and put up with longer overall travel times but a shorter time away from earth.

I like to imagine that Mars could be made pretty comfy if enough people are there and there are adequate facilities, so crews going further out could stop over to decompress psychologically.

>>11618458
Then use copper.

>>11617766
We’ll get there eventually.

>>11618845
It doesn't really make sense to go from Earth if you have a functional Mars colony with basic amenities, and I don't see us going to the outer planets with people without at least that. Also from Mars it's easier to launch a fucknormous ship which makes your provisioning situation much easier.

>>11618770
How many this time?

>>11618854
it's still 60
it will always be 60

>>11618858
Until Starship comes online anyway.

>>11618245
Everyone has heroes except depressed teenagers.

>>11618427
>This is different because people will be out of a job permanently

Get a different job.

>>11618080
>>11618210
>Salvatore
Savior
>Cesar
Caesar/Emperor
>Pais
Country

Obvious pseudonym is obvious. These patents are either soft disclosure of black projects or disinfo designed to make people chase red herrings.

>>11618816
Vertical line down the middle looks like a Falcon 9

>>11618865
Why? I can admire someone for their work, outlook or thoughts but I'm not gong to be surprised when they do / say something I disagree with.
I don't get the whole "look how great this guy is", "oh wait he said something I disagree with, maybe he isn't that great".

>>11618909
>I don't get the whole "look how great this guy is", "oh wait he said something I disagree with, maybe he isn't that great".
Leftists treat politics as religion so disagreement is heresy.

>>11618912
I'd kill to see this person's post history to match it up with this unironic statement

>>11618921
How about you fuck off back to Discord.

>>11618909
>I don't get the whole "look how great this guy is", "oh wait he said something I disagree with, maybe he isn't that great".

That’s why only depressed teenagers have no heroes or idols. Normal people don’t discard an idol or hero in their mind simply because they think something they disagree with; if anything, it’ll provoke them to consider that alternative view more closely.

>>11618865
actually, I'd say it's mostly teenagers and retards the ones who have heroes

>>11618943
You’re just jaded.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the Starship hop going to use only one engine?

>>11618975
Yes. 150m on one engine, then higher with three.

>>11618976
Will it be fully fueled during the hop or only partially fueled, or is that unknown?

>>11618977
Unknown.

space force will have a livestream on the 6th where they'll release alot of details
http://spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=55651

supposedly things like ranks, what they'll call space troops, etc. may be announced here

>>11618609
Can you tell us what rocket that is?

Since the future is nearby, which SHMUP ship would the most likely candidate to actually work IRL for space missions?

>>11619018
None of them. No ship that size is worth it without magic compact fusion torch drives.

>>11618773
A couple month communication disruption is well worth a 5 million ton payload launch to Ganymede imo

>>11619023
I suppose. The only one I can think of even remotely flying (atmospherically) is the vic viper, and that's only because some japanese guy actually managed to build a working model that's still off scale. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7-OndmJOUM

>>11618760
Forecast for China is smoggy with scattered large boosters

>>11617913
>Be SR-71
>leak like a sieve like a boss by design

>>11618487
>This post is probably trolling, but there are plenty of young people who got the virus, didn't die, but needed to be hospitalized.

200k deaths or so in five months acros the entire globe, it is literally, absolutely fucking nothing. Fuck off.

>>11619000
Well, it's definitely Russian design. With an RD-180 for the first stage. I'm guessing it's the single core variant of the Rus-M rocket.

>>11618977
Starship doens't have a twr above 1 with anything more than about 100 tons of fuel in it if its flying on one raptor.

>>11619182
This is a space flight thread. Fuck off.

>>11619032
So just a regular Friday, then?

>>>/g/75681010
Feels bad, man

>Boing!

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/04/new-report-says-sls-rocket-managers-concerned-about-fuel-leaks/

desu fuel leaks are more common than they seem. Blackbird also leaked fuel mostly because components that heat and cool are hard to seal up properly and adding a proper "fuel tank" would have cost more in mass than the lost fuel to leakage.

>>11619306
>"According to these officials, they have conducted extensive scaled testing of the gaskets and seals used in the core stage; however, it is difficult to precisely predict how this large volume of liquid hydrogen will affect the stage."
Imagine only building a single test tank in ten years. Imagine blowing that tank up by filling it with air. Imagine then having to risk your actual flight hardware because you don‘t know whether the cryogenic fuel will stay in it after all.

>>11619344
Meanwhile SpaceX can make at least one upper stage a month

>>11619352
Let’s also not all forget that these starships in Texas are also technically upper stages too. The first stage will be a bit longer

I can tell that Musk is anxious to get off this stupid planet

>>11619306
>However, program officials told us that some production work, originally planned for completion at Michoud Assembly Facility, remains to be completed in parallel with test preparation at Stennis Space Center before test firing the engines.
Given project management so far, can't expect doing tasks in parallel like that to go well.
> However, the program’s current schedule leaves little margin between the release of this version and the engine test fire, and should there be any software issues, this could delay green run testing.
>should there be

>>11619400
I want nothing more than to run a massive mining and refining company from the seclusion of my gigantic creepy spaceship

>>11619400
Aren't we all?

>>11619224
I didn't start it, suck my dick faggot.

>>11619344
Wasn't the entire point of SLS to reuse Shuttle hardware? Did they forget how to make hydrolox tanks?

>>11619413
Considering the glacial pace, you have to wonder if people didn't write shit down on napkins or kept it in their head and retired and got alzheimer.

>>11619403
>Not wanting to be a space trucker
Minecucks get half-load values minus expenses.
Also this remind me mining/hauling operations on Discovery FL years ago, it was comfy.

>>11619413
Considering the tank was basically the only thing they had to actually strengthen and redesign properly and it took them 10 years, I‘m inclined to say yes.

>>11619306
Nothing would be better for the future of manned space exploration in the US than for SLS to get canceled. You just can't fucking develop a rocket like this, it's ridiculous.

>>11619403
Sounds idyllic

>>11619000
>>11619208

It’s a rendering of a future Russian rocket called the Soyuz-6

>>11619344
>>11619413
>Imagine then having to risk your actual flight hardware because you don‘t know whether the cryogenic fuel will stay in it after all.

The fuel isn’t magically going to pour out like a bucket with a hole, these are tiny gaps that only hydrogen with it’s tiny particles can get through.

>Did they forget how to make hydrolox tanks?

The Shuttle had plenty of hydrogen leaks throughout the years and the problem was never fully solved. The Delta 4 also has them, it’s a regular cause of scrubs for it. Hydrogen leaks are just a fact of life for big hydrogen tanks, you can mitigate them but never fully stop the chance of a leak.

>>11619427
This is not rocket development. This is politics. This is spreading jobs out to various constituencies for re-election.

>>11619413
The core stage is longer (64.9m to 46.9m) with the same 8.4m diameter, so it holds a lot more [math]H_2[/math] (2 million litres to 1.5 million litres). It is larger than than anything they'd done before, but the point of the core stage was to build upon the STS external tank concept...so why is the thing apparently so much an issue at this stage that GAO pointed it out? It's even literally the Michoud Assembly facility building it.

>>11619442
>so why is the thing apparently so much an issue at this stage that GAO pointed it out?

Because there’s somethings you don’t find out until physical testing with cryogenics occurs?

>>11619413
>Did they forget how to make hydrolox tanks?
Yeah. Without constant effort, technological prowess backslides. All the engineers who worked on stuff like the Atlas V are dead or dying, and the slump in spaceflight following the end of Apollo resulted in a lot of knowledge being lost. They were building artisan rockets, same with the Shuttle, and with artisan crafts you lose knowledge when you lose the masters. The people building the SLS are like novice carpenters who stumbled into the workshop of a master furniture maker. They have the tools, they have the designs and the notes, but they don't have the instruction or the experience of those who came before them.

This is why Musk is almost more focused on designing the production line rather than the rocket.

>>11619450
>All the engineers who worked on stuff like the Atlas V are dead or dying,

The Atlas 5 first flew in the 90s...

>>11619439
>>11619442
Why didn't they do an H2 leak test to verify leaks losses before popping the first tank in the max pressure one?

>>11619450
It hasn't even been 10 years since ET production at Michoud ended.

>>11619454
Jesus it's late. Saturn V.

>>11618427
I disagree. I didnt drive until I was nearly 30 and i see plenty of kids younger than equally disinterested.

I could have got 2 gamings PCs for the price of my driving license and 10 at least for the price and insurance of a car on top of that. Would definitely have availed of robotaxis alot when i was young.

lol wut

>>11619481
>lol wut
The fucking madlad

>>11619481
he's having a meltdown

>>11619466
>I could have got 2 gamings PCs for the price of my driving license
What dystopian hellhole is this?

>>11619481
Must have gotten good news from Neuralink.

>>11619481
He goes a little nutty when he's out "in the field" doing direct engineering stuff. He's been down at Boca Chica for a while I think. Literally in the field, in this instance.
It's a stressful environment but he's also in his element. Social norms start to melt away and we see Elon at the unhinged, unstable peak of his autismo power.

>>11619454
So over 30 years ago when the people involved were probably 50

>>11618816
seems to be a starship fullstack, with the little wings on the side

>>11619490
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. My motorcycle license was about a grand for tests alone.

>>11619481
>former CEO of Dogecoin
No wonder tesla is doing so well

>>11619569
That’s disgusting. Bloated bureaucracy is a very European tradition though

>>11619504
>He goes a little nutty when he's out "in the field" doing direct engineering stuff.
Any engineering project or science experiment that doesn't induce a SAN penalty is not sufficiently advanced.

>>11618984
Thanks.

>>11617913
[laughing in orange tank]

>>11619632
ORANGE TANK BAD

>>11619632
Easy Fix. Bring a better challenge.

>>11618865
No, people don't normally have heroes unless there's a major event and someone rescues them in person. Celebrities are not heroes, except for a scant few who have actually gone out and helped people in person. What people have, for the most part, are just infatuations.

>>11619442
>pic
What are those square things on the top of the tallest building?

>>11618427
>This is different because people will be out of a job permanently. We still don't have self driving trains for this reason.
There are a lot more people working on keeping the trains serviced. It's not that "people" will be out of a job, it's that *specific* people (train drivers) will be out of a job, and they tend to have labor unions behind them.
>>11618427
>1) a bus will still be cheaper
We get liberal mayors and city councils who keep wanting to tear up downtown streets for light rail, in the fucking street because there's nowhere else to put it. Usually the "trains" they want run on diesel fuel. Literally they're buses that can't be rerouted without rebuilding new rails. (Electric trains require a third rail or catenary, which is more expensive to build and an electrocution hazard too.)
>>11618476
Dude, learn to trim the botnet crap off of your urls before posting them. Literally everything after the "?" was useless.
>>11618505
>But you have bus passes where you can ride all day for a small amount
Learn the difference between fares and operating costs. Transit buses are heavily subsidized. The main reason for a fare is to keep bums from living in them. (Austin tried to go no-fare like 20 years ago.)

>>11619696
>No, people don't normally have heroes unless there's a major event and someone rescues them in person.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug

>>11619704
>The main reason for a fare is to keep bums from living in them. (Austin tried to go no-fare like 20 years ago.)

Homeless should be gassed.

>>11619716
Are you trying to say something, anon?

>>11619722
What do you mean?

>>11619716
hello Penn

>>11619718
All of Austin should be gassed.

Who needs a second stage?

>>11619747
Boosters is a stage, also who needs third stages, right?

>>11619700
air intakes probably

>>11619742
I have no idea what Norman Borlaug has to do with Penn Gillette. Does he like him or something?

>>11619716
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug
his war stuff looks pretty cool, but it also kind of looks like he laid the groundwork for the corporate takeover of food production, which is decidedly not cool. also increasing the human population by a billion people is not something that increases world peace; what he actually did was help create a billion more taxpayers and made our owners a whole lot of money, and that's what the prize was really for.

>>11619773
Fuck off communist misanthrope

>>11617811
They are also an energy company

>>11618184
you can aerobrake in jupiter/saturn/uranus/neptune too.

>>11619850
Aerobraking around Mars is stupid easy. Aerobraking around Jupiter requires you to go deep into its radiation belts and is much hotter/faster and probably isn't actually worth it.

>>11618453
>motorwoman, 25-year-old Brittney Tysheka Haywood, fell asleep at the controls
Imagine letting a woman drive anything

>>11619481
>Deus Ex
Good taste

>>11617722
Previous thread:

>>11614518

Continuity shall be maintained

>>11619864
Incel

>>11619758
Penn was doing the "Norman Borlaug is a Superhero" meme at least as far back as his podcast days in 2006.

>>11619887
I’d agree. Preventing the starvation of hundreds of millions of people and generally increasing the food supply is pretty neat.

>>11619773
Tuberculosis treatment & prevention as well as better industrial farming practices(Haber Process being the main thing) are the main reasons why the population simply exploded. TB once killed 1 in 7 people and still kills 1.4m-1.5 million people each year.

So, healthcare and fertilizer.

>>11619795
I can't decide if you're arguing that monsanto and its legacy are a good thing, or that you don't understand that the deadline of "we have to get into space before _____" is too many people
unless of course the _____ is a big asteroid, but that's a rerun and nobody wants to watch that again. Pandemic Earth is back in vogue.

>>11619864
>Brittney Tysheka Haywood
>Tysheka
Hmmmmm...

>>11619897
>Muh ebul corporations

Starvation is bad. If Monsanto makes lots of food, and thus prevents starvation, Monsanto is good.

> or that you don't understand that the deadline of "we have to get into space before _____" is too many people

There is no deadline beside planet-destroying events like gamma-Ray bursts, asteroid impacts, or the Sun’s growth on the scale of hundreds of millions of years. Just admit you’re an evil, human-hating communist degenerate who worships death.

>>11618451
why do you want automated anything?

you assume that the freeing of humans will result in a distribtuion of wealth instead of its concentration

you assume you will be in the 0.01% of the world population who will get to enjoy this

why dont you use your brain and stop being an idiot who deserves to be punched to death by superior minds like me

G-GREEN RUN ANY DAY NOW
SLS WILL BEAT STARSHIP ANY DAY NOW.....

ANY..... DAY......

https://twitter.com/caseydreier/status/1255639837345898496?s=21

oh no no no

>>11619914
>why do you want automated anything?

More automation means less human labor, which is desirable.

Why does it take so much energy to get to mercury?
Isn't it supposed to be the planet we're closets to most of the time?

>>11619919
Notch up another win for the Jobs Launch Program.

>>11619914
Mass automation means either UBI, richfags heads on spikes or a mass cull of poorfags. Pretty happy with all three possible outcomes desu.

>>11619923

>>11619923
Slowing down is harder than speeding up

>>11619944
Just lithobrake bro

>>11617722
When do we get a gosh-danged spacehook?
Also, how feesable would a luna mega-tether be? Not necessarily reaching all the way to earth.

>>11619919
>G-GREEN RUN ANY DAY NOW

Green Run isn’t an event that’s yet to happen, it’s a campaign of many tests, it started in January and work was halted a few weeks ago due to Coronavirus.

>>11619897
>too many people
Births are actually below the replacement rate in fully westernized countries (Europe, North America, Japan). If you want to do something about the population it has to be in China, India, and Africa.

>>11619914
I’ve always felt professionally redundant anyway it makes very little difference.

Better to live NEET on UBI than a miserable wagey pretending to be as useful as an old ai.

>>11619962
>If you want to do something about the population it has to be in China, India, and Africa.

China is well below replacement fertility rate as well. Africa us too dumb for spaceflight.

So India it is. Designated shitting orbits when?

>>11619973
>I want to live a purposeless unfulfilling and depressing life as a NEET lol

Having a job actually makes people happier, but I can understand how the idea is scary to autistic virgins

>>11619920
for who? you retarded piece of shit? are you gonna do a communsit revolution for freedom?

or do you
hahahahah
do you think there can be freedome with capitalism..anon i

>>11619934
why do you asume that, if people are as dumb as you theres no need for ubi, live in less than misery or die, they wont care and youll support them

anyoen who supports capitalism supports their own destruction yet theres lots of them.

youre like a guy who worked at a cassete factory in the 80s "oh i hope they invent something that makes my work redundant so i can rest"
and after cassete is obsolete hes forced to work twice the time per day rummaging dumpsters for food because he was so naive and stupid he thought the capitalistic boss would spread the benefits of automation between everyone instead of keeping it to himself, and he was coward not to support the communistical revolutions

if youre a worker that doesnt support communsitical revolutikona dn loses your job you deserve death and everything bad, thatrs just the objective reality of it

care about workers?

>>11619920
It's an argument for post-scarcity societies, the inmigration problem and overall advancement of the human species, now in favour of the individual... we will see.

>>11620020
Theres no such thing as a cassette factory those workers went on to something else at their plastic factory. >>11619982
My life has purpose outside of work so too most others especially women. Many of whom really have no business working at all.

>>11620020
Fuck off commie no one wants to hear your shitty ideology

>>11620020
>and after cassete is obsolete hes forced to work twice the time per day rummaging dumpsters for food

Imagine being so retarded you don’t know how to get a new job. This is how commies think.

anything happening today?

>>11620043
Nothing much, just a small announcement...

you tried OP

>>11619872
Yes.

>>11620044
wow its thursday already? i was thinking it's only wednesday. what the fuck where did wednesday go.

>>11620043
Redditors on r/spacex melting down over Elon’s twitter shitposts lol

>>11620049
Oh shit now I feel bad about talking about how commies should be exterminated sorry OP

>>11620060
Never apologize to OP, he's a faggot.

>>11619958
Just wrench the core onto the test stand and run it. It's not that hard in rocketry.

>>11620043
GAO released report that NASA projects(SLS/JWST/etc) are delayed, overbudget, etc again.

>>11620057
I looked a bit, it looks like some irregularity in vote mechanism. Normal posts seems to get ~100 votes and maybe few dozen comments. This one gets ~1K votes and ~500 comments. Either there are too many emotional people or there's vote riggning.

>>11620132
Which one? I was looking at their starship development thread, the latest comment was some fuckwit saying they can’t appreciate spacex any more because Elon is in charge of it
I just think back to the IAC 2016 cringefest when Elon was liberal Jesus, how times have changed

>>11620129
It’s literally just a compilation report of stuff we already knew from 2019 reports, the only real news in the report was the bit about SLS which said it might leak hydrogen when fully fuelled.

It’s over SpaceX bros...

>>11619413
Welcome to modern NASA where it devolved from "We do it because it is hard" to "We can't do it because it is hard".

>>11620167
What?

>>11620167
I still think Dynetics/SNC is going to get downselected.

>>11620179
I hope so

>>11620176
He's being a cocktease. I sincerely doubt SpaceX would seriously send over Starship as a lunar lander suggestion strapped to a fucking SLS unless they were pulling an elaborate april fools on old colleagues.

>>11620185
Isn't the Lunar lander permanently docked to the Gateway? It's not like Apollo where you take it from the Earth to the Moon. It's a Gateway <-> Moon system.

>>11620191
I think one of the requirements was it needed to be launched on the Senate Launch System because Reasons. I might be wrong of course.

>>11620185
>seriously
It would be a true big dick move to use the gap in ambition between Starship and Artemis to make a mockery of the proceedings

>>11620195
There wasn’t a requirement, providers get to pick their launch vehicles.

>>11620197
If Starship beats Artemis to the moon, then the mockery would happen no matter what happens.

>>11620191
That was before Gateway being removed from the critical path for the first landing. My bet is the announcement will be Block 1b cargo carrying the full lander stack.

So apart from atomic rockerts and braeunig, are there more free online resources that I can use to learn rocketry?

>>11620226
http://www.astronautix.com/
If you can get past how outdated the site looks. It even has this gem.

>>11620226

Kerbal Space Program with realism mods

>>11620211
>2032 Anno Domini
>SLS finally makes it to the moon
>It's been reduced to a single flag and footprint mission though
>Gateway long scrapped
>Everyone on the mission is a special non-binary gender and minority because reasons
>Arrive at the moon
>"Houston, we're entering the dark side, catch you for earth rise!"
>Excited as fuck! One giant leap for nonbinarykind!
>Earth rise comes around
>An entire fleet of shiny steel rockets come out doing lazy burns around your pod
>Try to hail them
>Get nothing but loud mariachi music in return
>Ignored them, they keep lazily burning fuel and hazing us
>Go in for landing
>Landing spot is surrounded by cybertrucks fitted with hydraulics doing bounces and flashing their headlights at us
>More mariachi music
>Worst day ever
Such is life at NASA.

>>11620225
That makes sense. But reading Wikipedia says that the Boeing proposal relies on reusing tech from Starliner. Is NASA really going to go through with that?

>>11620240
NASA doesn't give a shit. If they didn't have regulators of their own to satisfy they probably would have approved Starliner as it was while it tumbled out of the sky

>>11620236

white man are turning into trannies anyways, soon science will come full circle and it will be the same as the hay days but now everyone is on HRT

>>11620252
>it will be the same as the hay days but now everyone is on HRT
Based. Bring on Elon-chan

>>11620236
>They find the spaceport base
>It’s full of straight white men
>Wake me up.jpeg

>>11620259
>[MARACAS INTENSIFIES]

DyneticsChads and SNCChads get in here!

>>11620195
Wasn‘t the original plan to have a reusable three-piece system launched on commercial vehicles?

>>11620301
I know one of the Boeing talking points was that their lander could be launched on a single SLS Block 1B, as if it wasn't a requirement.

>>11620301
It looks like every competitor has their own system that they've proposed.

>>11620301
Yes, but that was entirely politically motivated. It was so that it would be harder to kill by a new administration.

>>11620151
I hate this current culture where everyone is only ever Jesus or Hitler at any given point.
It‘s pretty interesting how the US two party system influences media and in turn influences people‘s minds. People need to relearn how to disagree with each other on individual issues instead of dismissing people as enemies based on one stance on one issue.
This shit is so stupid.

>>11620259
>Xey call the crater that the spaceport is in "Diversity crater"
>But the port's denizens keep calling it "Elon crater"
>Xey ask the portspeople why do they use the "wrong" name
>"Well...we were here first."

>>11620323
2bh this is a global phenomenon

>>11620323
>"anyone who disagrees with my current feelings is my enemy"
lost all of my old friends because they turned into people like that. when you grow up you're supposed to be wiser, but most grownups are just children in adult bodies.

>>11620323
I don't even why people want to do that. I was like that for a short while and I found it so tiring.

>>11620307
1B won't be around till 2025, optimistically

>>11620357
I think one of the current path explored is the full lander is on Block 1b Cargo while crew is still on Block 1 Orion. Save time by not human rating the EUS.

>>11620042
>>11620036
>>11620042


hahah implying theres communism as an "ideology"

communism is common sense
communism is not staving your children in the eyeball because thats what youre doign with capitalism

communism is another word for common sense

this is the only objective truth, learn it or be wrong but nothing else can change

also build me a monument for giving you the chance to improve above total stupidity

americans LOVE to be fucked by their uper class, better behave, if you dont seem worht saving we wont after the revolution

>>11620387
Yeah that’s what the NSF article said, B1B cargo can launch nearly 45 tons to TLI. The LEM for example, was around 15 tons.

>>11620323
Yep, the virus has become a political battle rather than a scientific one. The media doesn't want to admit wrong doign so they stick to their gun and scaremonger. People who trust these media parrot these ideas.

Why aren't Europe or Japan getting in on the commercializing of space?

@11620392
yikes

>11620392
Go money bomb Bernie, he can still win!

>>11620401
Can't afford to lmao.

>>11620401
Not enough private sectors in Japan, not enough entrepreneur mindset.

For Europe, private companies are evil. Thus everything must be government mandated. Also lack any sort of entrepeneur mindset. "They're evil"

>>11620252
>mfw you're most likely right
A jew-free mars colony full of whites couldn't come soon enough. We need to find a refuge to fight against the ones who have fucked us up for so long.

>>11620398
>The media
the media isnt an unified structure anymore than "science" is. WHY CANT YOU STOP BEING AN UNEDUCATED WORTHLESS PIECE OF SHIT FOR ONE SECOND OF YOUR MISERABLE LIFE, I CANT UNDERSTAND WHY DONT YOU DO ANYTHING THAT'S NOT EMBARASINGLY STUPID ONCE IN YOUR LIFE, AT LEAST AS BY ACCIDENT

>>11620438
if you want that you better be better than jews, in science who are vastly overrepresented in every academic environment.

How thing stands now the colony will be 95% jew more or less, if every white started doublding their efforts they could get that to 80% in about 20 years,
yes, thats how dumb you are

>>11620457
CNN/MSNBC/FOX are clickbait tabloids nowadays. ABC is meh. CBS is p.good and straightforward for most part. NPR has taken a hard liberal stance. The popular ones thrown around are FOX/CNN/MSNBC. 2/3 are heavily liberal and 1/3 are heavily conservative. If you remove the political lense, the big 3 are same clickbait tabloid trash so they're essentially running the same algorithm for different viewers.

>>11620461
>How thing stands now
What?

>>11620475
>america is the world
>even then, the big 3 are all that exists
>not having 1/2 a neuron to look up good journalism
anon i...

>>11620482
jews are vastly smarter than whites,also nasa, white house, all branches of military up to the top have a lot of jews in it. lots of jews GENERALS

so sorry, everything you associate with "white" pride cannot be separated from jewish pride.

the difference is that race doesnt exist but religion yes

>>11620493
Parasitism isn't IQ tho lmao

>>11620507
get some nobel prizes then we'll talk goy boi, im just telling you how it is, not asking your opinion

if you were good at something youd realize that when youre good envious people talk shit.

everyone talks shit about us, thats how good we are

>>11620357
Doesn't stop Boeing from bidding their lander to be launched on a Boeing rocket with a premium Boeing upper stage.

>>11620514
Bring it on jewboi, I too have mastered jew-jitsu, for I'm a renegade jew who wishes to subvert the kalergi plan instead of the white race

>>11620487
No one gives a fuck about the world media. This is American public issue we're talking about, not world issue.

>>11620487
>America is the world.
Yes. In the rest of life as in spaceflight.

>>11620524
Based.

Let's say Starship has failed in some way or is taking much longer than anticipated to fully develop, and SpaceX has to fall back on heavily relying on the Falcon 9. How well of would SpaceX be? Sure, the F9 is so far the only reusable reusable lifter, but others are catching up and they have the benefit of looking at how RTLS boosters would work ahead of time unlike SpaceX. Would the F9 end up falling behind of newer better designed rockets? Or does SpaceX have such a significant lead that the F9 can be relied on for a while?

>>11620556
They'll probably put more work into certifying falcon heavy. Unless other rocket companies change their tune on re-usability, I don't see how they can usurp spacex from a cost per launch standpoint, only on tons to orbit.

>>11620556
Depends. F9/FH is developing larger fairings, so they can still compete just fine. Expendable F9/FH are still quite good. If it cost them ~30M to produce 1 rocket for F9, it will cost them ~80M to produce FH. Expendable Heavy is sold for ~$150M Expendable 9 is probably $90M or so. Their prices will still be better than their competitors, maybe save for BlueOrigin.

>>11620556
I think SpaceX would go bankrupt before they give up on starship. In the event that it becomes apparent that for whatever reason it's conceptually flawed and was never going to work from the start, they'd probably put more resources into developing Falcon Heavy and maybe even try to develop a Falcon Super Heavy with even more boosters.

>>11620556
There aren't any medium lift rockets in development that threaten Falcon 9's dominance, and at the very least the FH would continue flying as "assured access" if New Glenn is a better rocket. If the Falcon 9 is still flying when the next generation of reusable rockets comes online around 2030, it will have the upper hand on track record, and by then they'd likely be developing a new rocket or evolved Falcon to stay on top.

>>11620556
They can't afford to screw up with Starship because Starlink depends on it. Launching the minimum number of satellites required by FCC is not feasible with Falcons.

>>11620556
They'd probably rely on Falcon 9 just for crew/cargo missions to the ISS plus small commercial payloads, and Falcon Heavy for big launches like stacks of Starlink satellites and the larger commercial or government launches. Even in fully expendable mode it costs less than half as much as say one of it's direct competitors, Delta IV and has 20 tons more payload capacity. Frankly I doubt very much that any of the existing space companies will be able to catch up to SpaceX at this point, their pace has just been too sluggish. They can't or won't even bother to try for reusability which means in terms of contract cost SpaceX is going to outperform them in almost every case, and on top of that the Falcons have very competitive payload capacities in terms of sheer mass. I think if SpaceX were forced to rely on them exclusively most of the work to keep them competitive would just be to build a couple sizes of fairing to allow for physically larger payloads.

>>11620401
Britain was actually doing OK for it's size and 21st century relevance. They just keep it on the downlow because if taxpayers find out money is going anywhere except the National Health Service they chimp out. We'll see how the UK comes out of 2020. The EU are just white hating cucks who deserve the hell they've created.

cnbc.com/2018/04/21/uk-space-agency-aims-100-billion-by-2030.htm

>>11620623
>Falcon Heavy for big launches like stacks of Starlink satellites
What are the economics of flying Starlink on an FH with extended fairing? I'd imagine it could launch maybe 100 satellites at time, so would it be worth the extra cores?

>>11620457
>the media isnt an unified structure anymore than "science" is.

Yeah its a 2 sided structure when it's political, fucking amazing distinction you've got there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=hWLjYJ4BzvI&feature=emb_logo

Also next time you see an opinion headline, google it and see how many other outlets copied their homework.

>>11620647
Assuming numbers on wikipedia aren't complete bullshit, they should be able to put ~2.79x the payload into LEO with a FH at a rough asspull calc with full reuse.

>>11618084
based

>>11620682
Now do they have a big enough fairing to fit 167 starlink satellites in it and can it be carried on FH? Who knows. Will it even make it off the pad without shaking itself apart? Who knows.

>>11620647
Depends on how large their fairing size can be. F9's fairing/payload is perfectly stacked for 60 starlink's ~15 ton payload (reusable limit is 15.6 ton). Falcon Heavy can do 23 ton to LEO, so they can do ~90 sats @ 250kg max for reusable.

Its more efficient to do F9 reusable launch @ 60 sat right now.

>>11620623
>Falcon Heavy for big launches like stacks of Starlink satellites
Imagine the post launch Starlink trains. Imagine the pseudo astronomer butthurt.

where's the stream?

>>11620691
Note, that's just another bullshit number, because the rack to fit them would also be bigger and weigh more. It's just a theoretical number based on payload capacity of FH to LEO with full reuse vs Block 5 F9 payload capacity to LEO.

>>11620702
nasa tv

>>11620401
>commercializing of space?
Which is?
Right now the only business is a few satellites and that's already covered.
Spacex now is giving a hard time to state financed launchers, but that's it.
I don't see any room left for private companies.
(Btw without public funding spacex too would have gone bankrupt long ago.)

>>11620711
>we want a japanese-owned commercial space station
>jaxa will support this and act as a permanent tenant

or

>europe wants a competitor to spacex falcon/starship
>will provide multiple funding rounds and contracts to companies who wish to build such a rocket

>>11620610
Whats this business about minimum number of satellites and why does the FCC demand it

>>11620647
I think doubling to 120 isn't really even ambitious. If we go with that and assume that we're aiming to reach the initial 12000 satellite goal it would require 100 FH launches or about 15 billion dollars, a third less cost efficient than the current 10 Bn estimate for Starlink.

https://twitter.com/JimBridenstine/status/1255902514542718976
HAPPENING
BOEING BTFO

>>11620695
Based Chadlink btfoing pseuds.

>>11620754
They picked Elon's Junkyard & Spaceship Parts over Boeing for a lander.
Fuck me, that's gotta sting.

>>11620754
EVERY LANDER BUT BOEING'S
HOW WILL THEY RECOVER

Let's gooooo!

>>11620761
Human Landing System looks like the very essence of Designed By Committee. It's like everyone took a part, isolated themselves and got together after 5 years then superglued the parts together.

>>11620761
DYNETICS CHADS, GET IN HERE!

>>11620773
Hedgefunder's Lunch system

>>11620761

>>11620754
>>11620761
i dont get it. how are they going to fund 3 landers? sure, spacex can fund starship on their own, but what about the other two? lunar landers aren't going to be cheap, so how will nasa fund them? i could see nasa doing spacex (since they are self funded), and another team (nasa will provide most of the funding), but this just seems like it's going to fail. maybe they expect another downselection?

>>11620761
Is that the newest Starship design? Big window and control surfaces are gone and solar panels(?) on the nose, but doesn't look steel.

>>11620788
You don't think NASA would launch anything not Foam Orange or Titanium Oxide White and Black, do you?

Can't wait to see the contract selection document that ethers boing

>NASA awarded contracts worth a combined $967 million

oof

>>11620761
>Awarding starship contracts when it hasn't even left the ground
Yeah, this is never happening

>>11620754
>>11620761
This makes my rocket the big rocket.

>>11620794
>"Yeah, sorry. We couldn't show you any of our software or anything."
>"Secret sauce you know. Our competitors might steal it."
>"Just take it or leave it."

>>11620773
It really does look like an autistic LM, I haven't been paying attention to Dynetics but their concept looks like a better lander. Certainly has a lower center of mass so there's less chance of it tipping over during landing. Rabbit ear solar panels look really fucking goofy but I think they're those soft unrolling type so they'll be very space efficient before deployment. I actually hope they get the pick because Sierra Nevada Corp is working with them on it and SNC is one of the other companies working on expanding habitats. I like that Starship concept too, although I'm not sure how it would work with no fins at all for reentry guidance.

>>11620783
Christ its going to be that first piece of shit. It's a dream team of government tit suckers "collaborating" and "cooperating" and "heritage".

>>11620797
>Awarding Dynetics lander contracts when it hasn't even left the ground
>Awarding National Team lander contracts when it hasn't even left the ground
The other landers will be launched on Vulcan and New Glenn, which haven't been launched either.

>>11620787
>“NASA’s commercial partners will refine their lander concepts through the contract base period ending in February 2021. During that time, the agency will evaluate which of the contractors will perform initial demonstration missions. NASA will later select firms for development and maturation of sustainable lander systems followed by sustainable demonstration missions. NASA intends to procure transportation to the lunar surface as commercial space transportation services after these demonstrations are complete.”

>>11620803
I'm not really sold on the 8 fucking thrusters, 4 on two sides thing. That's going to be a massive pain if you need to roll adjust.

>>11620807
>"ferry pilot between Earth and the moon" will be a real job description within a few years
God bless America.

>>11620812
It's kinda hard to see but there are little RCS packs at the upper tips of that truss structure and the landing rockets actual chamber size doesn't look much bigger than a clenched fist, they've just got YUGE vacuum bells to give them a better ratio.

$579m for BO national team
$253m for Dynetics
$135m for SpaceX

That's interesting

>>11620805
Yeah, I don't think any of them are going to make it to the moon, at least not on the timetable people are discussing.

>>11620820
nice

>>11620819
Yeah, I'm not talking RCS, but I'm talking Worst Case Scenario and you're suddenly spinning and you need to recover to avoid making a new crater.
Call me old fashioned, I'm a fan of symmetry.

this stream is aggressively scuffed

>>11620820
That indicates they expect Starship to be largely operational next year without much extra funding.

that spacex render showing the new landing legs looks terrible. There's no way they actually work with that little clearance.

High res National Team lander pic with a cargo lander in the background

>>11620833
They can extend a bit it looks like

Also we’re on page 6, fuck off with that new thread

So what, starship will be in lunar orbit and wait for crews from Orion to land them?

>>11620838
Getting flashbacks to landing on minmus on the fucking engine bell from looking at that render.

>>11620840
No, this is warning the SLS team to get their shit together or get cut out of the picture entirely.

https://www.dynetics.com/newsroom/news/2020/dynetics-to-develop-nasas-artemis-human-lunar-landing-system

List of Dynetics subcontractors
>Thales Alenia Space Italy
>Draper Laboratory
>Sierra Nevada Corporation
>Oceaneering International
>Paragon Space Development Corporation
>United Launch Alliance
>Dynamic Concepts Inc.
>Maxar Technologies
>Creare LLC
>Craig Technologies Inc.
>L3Harris Technologies Inc.
>ILC Dover
>Sierra Lobo Inc.
>JBS Solutions
>All Points LLC
>Cepeda Systems & Software Analysis Inc.
>Victory Solutions Inc
>Astrobotic Technology
>ATA Engineering Inc.
>Ecliptic Enterprises Corporation
>Bionetics Corporation
>APT Research Inc.
>Space Exploration Engineering
>Osare Space Consulting Group
>Tuskegee University

>>11620833
Seriously, what is going to be the margin of error for a landing angle? If that thing is even 1% off on it's landing the entire stack is tipping and blowing to bits like that one F9

>>11620846
>>United Launch Alliance
Oh so that's where the BoingBux are going.

>>11620846
Draper is lowkey the real winner here

>>11620820
Makes a good bit of sense. Gotta give the biggest check to the prom queen team, underdogs get the middling payout, middling risk and middling reward investment, SpaceX gets the lowest because they're already doing most of the heavy lifting themselves and their "lander" doesn't even use the project's workhorse rocket.
>>11620826
Oh yeah I get that, if I were to just guess, since i don't know anything about the Dynetics lander, I'd guess that they have thruster-out capability to still safely land on only four of those rockets, so if one of them fails out the counterpart shuts off automatically.
>>11620833
From that other shot of it landing it looks like the legs extend significantly further out, and then contract as the weight of the ship settles onto the shocks.