/sci/ - Science & Math

ceasium-hydrogentlemen nuke rockets when

Why does NASA suck so hard?

>Be "fresh" AE graduate
>See that Dynetics won
>Figure that they'll be looking for more employees
>Check their site
>"Bachelor's Degree and 10 years experience minimum, Master's preferred" on most of their positions
>mrw

>>11623213
You'd have a better shot at getting a job through Dianetics.

I want these all to make it just for the chance of them being in the same frame on international television. It's humiliating that these can exist in the same decade

>>11623324
Absolutely mogged Jesus Christ how will the competitors even justify their own lives after such a humiliation?

>>11623197
Whenever hydrogen stops being a meme
Aka never

>>11623213
Apply to be a janny at spacex bro

>>11623324
How long until ground control has to discipline their astronauts for not spending time in their own landers.

>>11623324
Why is America the only one with landers? I thought Gateway was an international project like the ISS?

So when can I buy a space minivan to launch from my moon house?

>>11623410
America is the best

>>11623342
NASA will make it so BO lands in 2024, Dynetics in 2025 but for cargo only, and Lunar Starship will be delayed to 2028 because of qualifications issues.

>>11623416
Blue Origin actually doing something?

>>11623173
Can Giga Shelby combat the girthy might of W I D E M A N?

>>11623324
Whats that pipe in the middle of the cargo/crew bay? It visible through the windows.

>>11623324
Maybe if we aggressively circulate this shoop, some science reporter will make a clickbait article about it.

>>11623426
Stripper/fireman pole. For both entertainment and movement between decks.

>>11623410
The gateway is so international partners can broadcast a second american flag in 4k

>>11623430
Space X delivering other two landers at once, making Jeff cry

>>11623400
You can't discipline. There's no discipline in space.

What are they gonna do, not send you on the next mission? Astronauts never get repeat missions anyway.

>>11623426
Probably just for people to climb up in micro-g

>>11623435
I thought Jefferies tubes are for that

>>11623426
>>11623435
Could also be the downcomer pipe for the LOX header tank they keep in the nose

Actually if you could make the pipe a firepole that would be the cheekiest weight saving ever

>>11623416
>Lunar Starship will be delayed to 2028 because of qualifications issues.

Good thing starship is a launch and return system so that can't happen. They'll just send their own astronauts to watch the nasa astronauts from an ivory tower after blowing lunar regolith fucking everywhere

>>11623450
>Could also be the downcomer pipe for the LOX header tank they keep in the nose

>Day 27 of life on Starship, things are getting a little stuffy
>I go over to the LOx pipe passing through the habitat, and open a ball valve
>with a loud hissing noise, liquid oxygen starts spraying out into the cabin
>I let it run for a few seconds, spilling several liters of oxygen, and close the valve
>the oxygen rapidly boils, rejuvinating the air
>"And those SLS fags said that life support would be a big problem for making Starship viable"

Dm-2 conf is today

>>11623410
>I thought Gateway was an international project like the ISS?
Everyone but the US and Russia on the ISS is there for a participation trophy. With Gateway even the Russians are also rans. There's a reason the State Department calls NASA "space diplomacy."

>>11623455
Bonus points if they land on top of an old non American robot lander and destroy it.
>NOOO YOU CAN'T JUST ERASE MY COUNTRY'S ONE ASTRONAUTICAL ACHIEVEMENT THIS IS LITERALLY SPACE GENOCIDE
>ha ha vacuum Raptor go fwooosh

>>11623190
>day 3 of the moon mission
>holy fuck this thing is cramped
>every surface is plastered with Bezos pictures his cold lizard eyes pierce my soul every time I try to take a shit
>the glamour is starting ot wear off
>look out my tiny window at the SpaceX lander
>they're using the crane as a fucking SWING....wait, whose that third person?
>ohmy god they smuggled a prostitute! There's a fucking MOON WHORE over there
>rig fuel tanks to explode, spend rest of time on moon drunk banging hookers with the spacex chads

>>11623476
Absolute genius
/sci/ solves yet another problem

>>11623213
Getting a job in any industry isn't about experience, it's about who you know.

If you didn't make contacts in the industry while in school you fucked up. Should have figured out where you were going before you even graduated fampai.

You're best bet now is to just spam applications to anyone and everyone even vaguely in your field and hope someone takes pity on you.

>>11623505
>>ohmy god they smuggled a prostitute! There's a fucking MOON WHORE over there
I hear her blowjobs are out of this world.

>>11623501
>Bonus points if they land on top of an old non American robot lander and destroy it.

I doubt that’d be permitted but it’d be fucking hilarious and comparable to flying the entire US Air Force over their capital as far as power moves go. Mars will be american for at least twenty years before any other shitty country puts people there, so we might as well go ahead and claim the whole thing as a US territory and ban everyone else, ensuring US dominance of human history for eternity and achieving what even the greatest conquerers could not. Orbital defense platforms when?

>>11623519
>ensuring US dominance of human history for eternity

That sounds like the worst thing ever, pretty much everything about America is fucked.

t. American

>>11623525
>t. American

Sure thing Chang

>>11623519
Orbital defense platforms, hell. Starship is the ultimate MIRV. Imagine that during reentry it rolls so the cargo doors face the ground and becomes a Death Piñata full of nuclear stealth cruise missiles that scatter in every direction, and then the vehicle itself crashes into a city. Project Pluto eat your heart out.

>>11623536
Nice argument, I'm really enjoying my ever restricting freedoms, shitastic two party system where both sides conspire to fuck each other over, endless bullshit wars that make the entire world hate us. But yeah don't let that get in the way of your murika fuck yeah! spiel.

>>11623551
This post reeks of college freshman.

>>11623213
make it up

>>11623555
Refute any of that, its factually fucking correct.

>>11623551
>noooooo stop blowing the shit out of evil terrorists and commies noooo

>>11623565
It's a load of "woe betide us, everything America does sucks" bullshit that's been spoonfed to you since you learned how to look at a television.

>>11623476
Shouldn’t this thing have some soft-to-the-touch stuff lining the interior walls for insulation and to prevent agonizing injuries when people inevitably knock into them?

>>11623444
>You can't discipline. There's no discipline in space.

Yet. Brigs will inevitably become a part of many large spaceships and they’ll have officers or something

>>11623567
>fabricate evidence and invade sovereign countries on proven false pretenses
>they start blowing your troops up
>WTF NOOOOOOOO THAT'S LITERALLY TERRORISM YOU CANT DO THAT

>>11623579
I haven't watched TV since I was 8, go back to /ptg/ you delusional patriotard.

>>11623587
>they start blowing your troops up

America has always had a high KD ratio. The tiny losses we take are easily replaced

>>11623593
I had a family member come back in a coffin over these bullshit wars. Absolutely fuck you for supporting this shit.

>>11623596
>I had a family member come back in a coffin over these bullshit wars

Based. The highest honor a man can attain is death in glorious battle.

>>11623587
It's one thing to be critical of the United States. It's quite another thing to believe that nothing the United States does is right, or that the "great and terrible evils its committed for -" are they still saying it's all done in the name of oil? They've been saying that for so long I don't even know if they've come up with anything new since that narrative fell apart -"oil far outweighs any of the good it does," because it's always a segue for "this is why we must pursue a progressive agenda where ethnic minorities are ethically superior human beings and they must all become citizens of our nation to atone for our sins, and if you don't like it, you're a racist fucking bigot." College kids (who are quite possibly the most conformist people you can find these days) always come out saying the same thing.

>>11623600
So tell me then, oh enlightened one. What are the purpose of these endless fucking wars?

>>11623596
>I had a family member come back in a coffin over these bullshit wars

I have friends who had to bury scores of their brothers to these stupid wars. They are great and terrible human tragedies, but one needs to be able to hold a broader perspective than each tragically lost human life can reveal.

>>11623600
Joe McCarthy did literally nothing wrong except stop before he was done.

>>11623604
>What are the purpose of these endless fucking wars?

Killing bad people, glory, and I’m sure there’s some sort of economic benefit.

Fucking hell, can you people go to bed so we can resume with a better thread in the morning?

>>11623604
A catastrophically failed attempt to create a more stable geopolitical situation in the Middle East - a long projected and broadly inevitable hotpoint for future conflicts, given the endless sectarian violence, eternal grudge matches, and Islam's preaching for violent conquest. It basically kicked off what it aimed to prevent. Unfortunately, the ongoing violence is just about the only thing that's stopping it from spreading outside of its borders, as was keenly felt when Obama pulled out of Iraq, allowing ISIS to spread exactly as it was predicted it would.

>>11623609
>bad people

Its just mud farmers you radicalised by invading their countries dumb cunt. Nothing inherently bad about most of them.

>glory

Absolute cringe, nothing glorious about these shitfights. Wow you put a bullet in a women who looked like she had an ied vest on and then got blown up by a car bomb, yeah valhalla surely awaits you lmao.

>>11623610
It's mid afternoon in Beijing so there's probably another eight hours of this tripe ahead.

Jannies, do your job.

>>11623608
You know, you're not wrong. MacArthur was right, too.

>>11623616
>if you don't like our pathetic shitfight of a two party system and enriching the military industrial complex through endless murder you are a chink

How's the weather in tel aviv kike?

>>11623614
>Its just mud farmers you radicalised by invading their countries dumb cunt

So bad people.

> Nothing inherently bad about most of them.

Commies and Islamists are inherently evil. Nuke ‘em

>>11623624
Behold the intellectual capabilities of your average /ptg/ poster

>>11623585
Wouldn't that also imply large enough workforces to take up the slack? I can't see that happening until passenger Starships are being used for crew rotation at full hundred man capacity.

Why is there no go to site for space news? They all have their pros and cons. Arstechnica? It's Berger jerking off SpaceX. NSF? Good but only covers a handful of events. Space News? Good but mostly covers shit nobody cares about.

>>11623649
>Why is there no go to site for space news?

There’s always here. Ignore the gunfire and it’s fine

>>11623585
Just space them bro

>>11623649
just follow the 20 odd twitter accounts of space news people, and the 10 odd worthwhile space scientists like McDowell. All those news article are is whatever is tweeted out with fluff added anyways

>>11623620
MacArthur was evil because he didn’t want to attack the Soviets like Patton did. Could have obliterated communism then and there.

>>11623657
Twitter is cancer to use though. Not to mention lots of space personalities love inject personal political opinions into everything.

>>11623324
>Could also be the downcomer pipe for the LOX header tank they keep in the nose
The header tank is probably not in the nose for moon starship because it doesn't bellyflop and wants its CoM to be as low as possible. The top is probably a docking port because it ain't flat for no reason.

>>11623663
I hope we see two Starships docking one day, like two big beautiful pp.

>>11623658
Yeah could have replaced communism with our neat globohomo gayplex democracy and had the Russians buttfucking each other and chopping their kids dicks off.

>>11623669
It’s okay anon I’ll suck your cock and show you the wonders of homosex

>>11623663
>The top is probably a docking port
*urethra

>>11623508
What if you're an anti-social autist like me?

How long do you think it’d take for the relevant authorities to let people bring dogs to Mars or the moon?

>>11623678
>zero-g-frogs.gif

>>11623692
That reminds me. They actually gestated frog embryos in micro-g and hatched them, so people who doubt we can reproduce in space got BTFOd ages ago

>only one crewed mission to the moon per year
They're going to need to open this up to commercial crews like they do for the ISS.

>>11623703
Nothing is stopping private entities from doing their own missions independent of NASA

>>11623703
They can't build SLS any faster. Faster cadence implies Starship.

>>11623706
NASA would have to allow them to use the Gateway, lander, and any assets on the surface.

>>11623709
And NASA will have to ask to dock to Moon-Mart

SpaceX isn't interested in going to the Moon. They'll take paying customers, but they won't go there themselves. NASA only plans on going once a year. So who's going to pay to go to the Moon? Maybe foreign governments will be willing to pay SpaceX to send crews to the Moon?

>>11623720
I hope so

just imagine
>Lunar Cargo Dragon XL's
>Lunar-optimized crew Starships
>Refueling tanker Starships
>Custom crewed #dearmoon orbital flyby
>Mars cargo Starships
>Mars crewed colonial Starships
>Starlink delivery Starships
>Earth-to-Earth suborbital Starships
all operating at once

Any official or unofficial news on potential raptor test fire/ hop dates for starship sn4?

>>11623600
>It's one thing to be critical of the United States. It's quite another thing to believe that nothing the United States does is right
There's a point where doing showy right thing is just a smoke screen for a less visible genocide of freedom and democracy.
The current president demonstrate how low he'll go to divert attention away and claim he's defending people from oppressive deep state conspiracy when he actually want to protect the plutocracy that let him and his rich friends be treated like medieval lords.

But anyway, space flight thread.
Where would we be if the US reduced his military spending by half and put it in various space project?

>>11623675
You live in a social society, you are a social animal. Learn to be social even if you hate it. If you aren't good at being social, then fake it until you make it.

There isn't any substitute for socialization and its the key to pretty much everything.

>>11623838
People who aren’t social aren’t people.

>>11623514

Top secret design specs for the interior of blue origins lander

>>11623505

>>11623874
Imagine being unemployed.

>>11623501
>Everyone but the US and Russia on the ISS is there for a participation trophy.

Meanwhile the shell was made in Italy and they have managed to corner to market on external shells.

>>11623834
Found the guy who's broadly left leaning and likely socialist sympathetic.

>>11623884
Hint: the tip-off has nothing to do with your criticism of the current administration.

>>11623501
>Everyone but the US and Russia on the ISS is there for a participation trophy
Be nice or we won't send you beer.

>>11623545
>tow an asteroid from the belt into a high earth orbit
>cancel out it's velocity with a big retrograde burn
>asteroid starts falling
>there is no defence against a big ass rock falling from space
>impacts at several kilometers per second
>damage would make the russian 50 megaton device look tiny
>conference held at neutral antarctica
>the one year war starts

>>11623834
>the US should increase it's space funding
More like other countries should have a space program. Space is a gold mine but barely anyone spends any money on it.

>>11623887

>>11623720
>SpaceX isn't interested in going to the Moon.

They will absolutely test Starship multiple times on the Moon before attempting a Mars mission. Elon also said we ought to have a moon base by now.

>>11623900
>Space is a gold mine
I'll argue it's not. not YET.
We do not have the technological level to exploit it. So at best spending money on space program would start by developing the technology and studying human survival in space (instead of just another flag planting operation on a different).

>>11623213
The memes are real pal.
but nobody believes me

>>11623912
Companies throw up cubesats with cameras on them and make millions. Other companies put antennas on the ground to monitor space traffic and make millions. There are markets out there if you look for them.

>>11623213
As space grows, more companies will join in the space economy and more jobs will open up and the requirements to join will go down.

>>11623912
>We do not have the technological level to exploit it

Ehhhhhhh. The price of gold per pound is substantially higher than the cost-per-pound of payload on Falcon 9. Mining Psyche might actually be profitable already.

>>11623904
They existed but weren't profitable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MegaBots_Inc..

>>11623929
Yea, but these ones sucked.
Not only where they ridiculously slow, the "weapons" where also more or less a joke.

>>11623925
The question isn't if something is more valuable than its weigh launched into LEO.
The question is if something is valueable enough to launch the facilities and personal to mine it into orbit and some ablative heatshields.
Getting stuff from orbit to earth is several orders of magnitude cheaper than launching stuff from earth to LEO.
As you can imagine, it highly depends on the scale of operation.
If you have a mostly self-sustaining station in earth orbit, you will mostly have to re-supply them with heatshields and kick-stages to de-orbit extracted ressources.
And these can weight far less than whatever you mine.

>>11623190
>tfw no British space program
>no British Experimental Rocket Group
Why is my country such a fuck up when it comes to space travel?

>>11623955
The UK is increasing their spending on space but it's not anything spectacular.

>>11623922
Orbital space is currently only good for communication and spysat, it's centered around Earth not around other celestial resources.
They'd create a Kessler syndrome if they found a way to make money of it.

>>11623925
Profit require the new sources to cost less to exploit than other available source. We are more likely to mine underwater than space in the next 100y.
If you somehow managed to flood Earth with space gold and rare ore their prices would plummet unless the demand increase.

As said by someone else there's also the matter of how much you spend to setup the infrastructure. The barrier to entry and the monopoly on space resource would make a mockery of free market and our economic system.

>>11623967
>The barrier to entry and the monopoly on space resource would make a mockery of free market and our economic system.

Based. Mercantilism is coming back, bitches.

>>11623955
we have always been paradoxical in aerospace, great concepts and engineering but absolute fucking brainlets in charge willing to drop anything at any moment

>>11624000
based black arrow trips

>>11623825
Its imminent. Perhaps tonight very likely this weekend.

>>11623955
Britain has a decent share of the Space market especially smallsatd and has two space ports in the works. The Scottish one especially could cause a decent space industry for the country due to its easy access to a very profitable orbit.

>>11623709
or they could stage in Low Lunar Orbit, the Gatewat is just a trap for Congress
>>11623887
SIEG ZEON

>>11623967
The first phase of denialism. Just straight up "won't happen". Then when we have Starships en route to Mars with mining and ore processing on board it'll be "w-well sure it's happening, I never said it WON'T happen, this is different".

>If you somehow managed to flood Earth with space gold and rare ore their prices would plummet unless the demand increase.
Had this discussion before. Wellcucks don't control orbital resources. Ohh you panicked and brought down the price of gold, plat, and iridium to pennies? That's cool, pass what you have around for a while and see how long it takes demand to go up with no supply incoming. I'll just park here in my platinum spaceship, maybe send some cheap sats into LEO with massive reflectors to show off my GOOOLD.

dynetics-spacex joint lunar lander

>>11624061
DROP
TANKS

>>11624061
That’s something I made in KSP

>>11624061
Nah, they'd probably just strap their lander to a FH and use a few kick-stages launched by other FH to get the required deltaV, assemble it in orbit and launch the crew with a human rated F9.
If they rushed it, they could probably get the first man on the moon since the 1970s by the end of the year that way.

>>11624064
Interesting idea, they could build a single engine vacuum-Raptor powered upper stage and launch it and droptanks for it with F9s for orbital assembly.
That droptank-stage could then perform the TLI way more efficient than one powered by a vacuum-Merlin ever could and you'd only need one FH launch and a few F9 launches for a manned lunar mission.
As this uses existing technology from SpaceX, I'd assume they could do that rather quickly if they wheren't focused on Starship that much.

>>11624091
>existing technology
hooking up cryogenic drop tanks in orbit is not existing technology, although Dynetics/SNC think they can pull it off (because they proposed it)

>>11623551
noooo if only china was the dominant hegemony >:-( china wouldnt be as BAD and EVIL as the US. i HATE my country. i wish china was in charge :'(

>>11624159
Strawman

>>11624159
This is your brain on /ptg/

>>11624162
lmao hovering in the thread waiting for replies to your troll bait. heres an ad hominem as well mr enlightened college freshman, you're a retard trying to appear smart

>>11624184
Ok bye migapede, enjoy your latest round of funding to Israel.

>>11623604
I dunno Mr. Zhou, you tell me?

>>11623190
So the black holes are thrusters? For the last bit of landing burn to not make a crater or something?

>>11624189
You probably worship jews in other ways.

CLEAN
*CLAP*
IT
*CLAP*
UP
*CLAP*

>>11624223
yeah, considering on the source selection statement NASA said they'd done a great job solving the debris problem that has to be it

>>11624223
How much effective thrust is lost when thrusters aren’t pointing directly downwards? Not sure I phrased that right

>>11624256
cosine of the angle is the number you're looking for

>>11623324
I already posted ages ago why direct ascent is a stupid idea. The Apollo engineers knew this, you can find all their research on it freely available. it's not impossible but it's a waste of fuel. And may I remind you that in-orbit refuelling is still science fiction. I don't know why /sci/ has put so much faith in a system which hinges on a technology that doesn't currently exist.

Starship is a meme, that airplane like thing at the top landing anywhere in the solar system, you've been reading too many science fiction books. Not only is direct ascent a dumb idea for all planets and moons but the design is only optimised for one celestial body.

>Inb4 they got the Artemis contract!
The core stage is probably legit, they have the Raptors and they're testing the tanks. What will happen is NASA will make them put a traditional upper stage and lunar lander atop it.

Public Notice of Cameron County Order to Temporarily Close State Highway 4 and Boca Chica Beach
Primary Date May 1, 2020 9:00 p.m. – 6:00 a.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date May 2, 2020 9:00 p.m. – 6:00 a.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date May 3, 2020 9:00 p.m. – 6:00 a.m. Closure Scheduled

I also like to add that /sci/ shouted me down when I called out the 550t BFR as horseshit... which went on to be scaled down So I was right. SpaceX does deliver but they hype up all their designs to appeal to sci-fi nerds such as yourselves. Remember Crew Dragon was supposed to have that funky interior with propulsive landing? Dropped. Remember Falcon Heavy was supposed to fly tourists around the Moon? Dropped. They both still exist but aren't as different from "oldspace" as was initially promised

absolute state of sci

>>11624317
>They both still exist but aren't as different from "oldspace" as was initially promised
But when oldspace proposes a concept nowadays, it seems fairly grounded, and then they cancel it with nothing to show for it. SpaceX over proposes, but they still get stuff done.

>>11624299
the plan isn't direct ascent, it's LOR again
this starship won't be an earth entry Starship, they have the Orion command module for that, and they aren't bringing Orion down to the surface

>>11624330
True I suppose

>>11624309
static fire tonight or tomorrow then hop the next day?

>>11624351
Hop probably next weekend if all goes well.

>>11624330
But according to this trend they will not end up being massively cheaper than oldspace. Sure they'll probably be cheaper but that's relative. Halving the cost is still too expensive to make space accessible for everyday people. Whenever any design claims to change things by an order of magnitude it's almost always bullshit. Even the Model T which was the most revolutionary change in car production ever was at most half the price of the competition.

>>11624317
>wahh, people disagreed with me
Who fucking cares, lmao. Being mad about 4chan arguments days later is anger management level, you're running on years at this point, that's high tier wizardry.
>SpaceX scales back its designs after the drawing board
That's all rocketry, you big dumb nig. You probably believed the line that the SLS would be quick and easy because it was made out of the parts bin. I pity you.

>>11624368
>But according to this trend they will not end up being massively cheaper than oldspace.
You're not actually paying attention to anything that's happening beyond your own selfish disappointment. The economics of full reusability are at play whether you launch 150t or 450t.

>>11624317
>I had an argument on the internet with random fanboys and I turned out to be right
Welcome to the internet?

>>11624317
they were dropped because starship makes them obsolete, plus i would much rather have a spacex that overpromised and still absolutely trounced oldspace like they are with falcon and dragon

Bill Gerstenmaier has only been with SpaceX for three months and he's already gotten SpaceX in good with NASA
holy shit

>>11624317
remember sls was supposed to launch in 2016
things change :^)

>>11624383
As if SpaceX doesn't owe their entire existence to NASA.
Falcon 9? Thanks, Daddy NASA.
Dragon? Thanks, Daddy NASA.
Crew Dragon? Thanks, Daddy NASA.

>>11624392
yes, NASA literally saved SpaceX early on with that Falcon 9 and Dragon development money
but NASA was busting SpaceX's balls over Crew Dragon just a few months ago, and now SpaceX have three fucking contracts for lunar cargo and crew services

>born just in time to see space colonies become at thing
>born to early to ever afford to be able to go to them

>>11624395
>NASA was busting SpaceX's balls over Crew Dragon just a few months ago
Yeah, because they want what they fucking ordered to exact specs. That's what NASA does.

>>11624368
>But according to this trend they will not end up being massively cheaper than oldspace.
They are though. Sure, John Smith who works at Dollar General might never be able to afford sending something into space, but the cheaper price per launch AND per mass of payload is still enough to encourage more operations in space. For decades the single biggest limiter of space flight was the cost of getting into orbit. Compare $1.5B to send roughly 20 tons to LEO (Shuttle) to only $62M (Falcon 9). That is a huge reduction in cost which allows for more frequent launches, more flexibility in missions, and more types of missions all for the same budget as before.

>>11624403
they changed the specs on SpaceX a couple of times just to fuck with them

>>11624395
Don't forget that SpaceX almost didn't win a Commercial Crew contract because some ((senators)) wanted only one provider for commercial crew transport, and that was going to be Boeing.

>>11624321
WHOANIGGAYOUEXPECTMETOREADALLTHATSHIT?

>>11624369
It's not that they scaled back the design it's that fanboys here defend anything they announce even if it's obviously bs. This place is basically r/futurism
>>11624370
Still won't change things by an order of magnitude. Name a single design in history that reduced price overnight by an order of magnitude. It will probably still be a couple decades before we see prices dropping that much.

>>11624412
look at all the deleted posts you dumb fuck

>>11624414
>Name a single design in history that reduced price overnight by an order of magnitude. It will probably still be a couple decades before we see prices dropping that much.
I think SpaceX is expecting that. Maybe not a couple of decades, but a couple of years. Much in the same way iterating on the Falcon 9 reduced it's cost significantly. Elon is well known for fibbing or stretching numbers, so it's your own fault if you're disappointed in what he said.

>>11624404
I like how you used the most expensive launch system ever in your comparison. Falcon 9 is half the cost of Atlas V. So my point still stands that they delivered but it wasn't anywhere near the wild initial claims of orders of magnitude cheaper.

>>11624421
>"haha I knew his numbers were bullshit all along!"
nice cope.

>>11623190
So this moon configuration is never supposed to return to earth right?
Because dont see wings for airbreaking or a heatshield.

>>11624433
some people got suckered by them
I was taking a hiatus from following spaceflight at the time (after watching the Columbia disaster cleanup as a kid)

>>11624414
>Still won't change things by an order of magnitude. ... It will probably still be a couple decades before we see prices dropping that much.
So basically, you directly admit that you're wrong already as a way of padding your argument. Then when it does drive costs down by an order of magnitude faster than your own prediction but not at SpaceX/Elon's notoriously optimistic timeline, you will come and cry that people disagreed with you when you made an extremely good argument you don't remember the details of anymore.

>>11624437
correct

>>11624437
correct, this is a deep-space-lander optimized Starship without aerofeatures and with thermal management (paint) considerations
it's going to go from NRHO (gatewat orbit) to the lunar surface and back again repeatedly, refueling in NRHO each time

>>11624422
>I like how you used the most expensive launch system ever in your comparison.
For good reason. NASA used the Shuttle for decades and was constantly hampered by how expensive and slow the launcher was. With now cheap the Falcon 9 is, much more can be done.

>Falcon 9 is half the cost of Atlas V. So my point still stands that they delivered but it wasn't anywhere near the wild initial claims of orders of magnitude cheaper.
It doesn't have to be orders of magnitude cheaper to have an effect on the scope of launches. Falcon 9 is "merely" half the cost of an Atlas V, but it also accounts for half of the commercial launches in 2018. Half of the market is significant, and if it's cheap for commercial then it's more than cheap for the government.

>>11624441
I never said it would, I said if it did it would take decades.

>>11624457
How much of this was actually due to reusability and not just due to cutting red tape?

>>11624321
spaceflight discussion only please this is so gay

>>11624398
they'll be dropped before you get there

>>11623395
> tfw most abundant element in the universe and people call you a meme

>>11624465
i dont remember where i heard this, but a fast-ass rocket could use fused hydrogen along with ceasium to magnetically propel the craft forwards

>>11624459
And you will hedge your bets again when it takes years, not decades.

>>11624473
Where is the market for this massive price drop?

>>11624461
Unknown since SpaceX has not released their price breakdown of the Falcon 9, but I guess that most of the price drop is due to how the rocket was designed. Its production is very lean. Parts were chosen based on cost. Operations and transport is kept cheap too. It seems like reusability isn't hurting SpaceX at the very least as they've been pricing reused F9's cheaper than fresh ones for a while.

>>11624470
Yeah, we're back to ion thrusters then and then we're talking Volkswagen tier acceleration.
I can find some old books talking about theoretical ion thrusters using caesium hydride (which is what you're talking about).

But that's all. Ion thrusters are slow as fuck.

https://www.elsevier.com/books/electric-propulsion-development/stuhlinger/978-0-12-395755-9

That's the book in question. 1963.

>>11624489
SpaceX itself. Eventually, the rest of the launch industry will grow into the new paradigm of designing and launching cheaper, less mass optimized equipment.

>>11624489
Any active element left within NASA would be more than happy to buy tons of launches from SpaceX if launches were that much cheaper.

>>11624299
>but the design is only optimised for one celestial body.

So every space craft ever

how much would sfg pay to go to space? the moon? mars? for me i think i'd be capped at $50,000 unless i was set for life

>>11624299
>And may I remind you that in-orbit refuelling is still science fiction. I don't know why /sci/ has put so much faith in a system which hinges on a technology that doesn't currently exist.

So what happens if you only believe existing technology can work and you only use existing technology?

>>11623203
All grant farm and redtape, no results.

>>11623649
Between Berger Arstechnica/NSF/SpaceNews what else do you need?

>>11624524
shelby.jpg

>>11624299
>And may I remind you that in-orbit refuelling is still science fiction. I don't know why /sci/ has put so much faith in a system which hinges on a technology that doesn't currently exist.
Then the technology will be developed when needed. If we only used technology that has been developed already then we would've never left the caves.

>>11623506
>>11623476
>tfw oxygen only needs 20 microjoules it ignite and just about any electrical system with switches/relays near the valve will blow everything up

Falcon Heavy will now also launch the power/propulsion module for Gateway. Another win for SpaceX rocket family.

>>11624540
>tfw oxygen only needs 20 microjoules it ignite
Oxygen doesn't ignite you dingus.

>>11624541
SpaceX will be launching more than half of the Artemis program at this rate

>>11624550
Of course they would. They're flying the most powerful American rocket from American soil.

>>11624550
They've got the only vehicle available to take anything meaningful to Moon right now.

>>11624545

>>11624557
that was a composite overwrap that ignited, not oxygen

>>11624529
I'm not sure, I just hate going to multiple sites and being disappointed.

>>11624562
Disappointed with what? We're living in exciting times, my friend.

>>11624566
I just feel unsatisfied with the options out there.

>>11624570
Be thankful we have 3 decent coverage of space industry. Mainstream media for general public does not even have a single reputable one, they're all divided by partisan hackery.

>>11623929
>>11623943
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvSQt_pBX9w

Tracked "mecha" can be as fast and maneuverable as modern tanks, minus the extra height reducing clearance of course. The MegaBots company wasn't profitable simply because it was for entertainment, not work. There's some cool "mecha" used in the timber industry. Some have legs to walk around, but most are tracked/wheeled. Though, people don't like the fact there's only 1 "arm".

>>11624545
You think it will be pure oxygen by the time it reaches nearby electronics? lol

>>11623943
>>11624579
I think we could see /real/ person/company invest their time into mech development starting from ground up with 0 assumptions(ala Elon Musk style of building). Why should mechs be slow? Why extra bulky? Why expensive? and so on. Mechs designs we've seen so far aren't constrained by physics, they're constrained by personal preference/bias/assumptions.

>>11624579
>mecha kinda suck, but not if we give them tracks
>hmm, should probably shorten it a bit too because the high profile makes it an easy target
>should probably reduce the arm, it's just a needless complication compared to a quick and efficient gimbal
Behold, a tank

>>11624587
You are correct. It is the same thing that happens when people think of "exoskeleton." Yet, they drive to work in an exoskeleton every day. Same with, "hover car" when "helicopters" exist and "flying car" when "planes" exist.

>>11624597
That was the whole point, but thanks for pointing that out. lol

>>11624597
lol

>>11624516
whats scary is I'm early 30's and already spent that much on alcohol and drugs, not even accounting for inflation
if you include whores it's way more
I'd trade it all for some sweet sweet orbit time, that or a liver transplant

>>11624587
Yeah but then you'd get to questions like why should a mech have legs? why should a mech be tall? Why should a mech have a single pilot? And you'd be right back at the tank.

I'd say you misunderstand elon. He didn't set out to build a sci-fi rocket. He set out to go to mars in a sustainable way, whatever that happens to be. So if you set out to blow shit up it doesn't necessarily lead to sci-fi mechs.

>>11624516
100k
except right now I can't even afford 6k EUR for a space on a dank parabolic flight

>>11624638
>why should a mech have legs? why should a mech be tall?
Because, cool factor is inefficient, but efficiency is not why people want gundams, hoverbike, and flying cars to exist.

>>11624638
Elon's way of thinking = working from ground up, not "build a scifi rocket." As in to ignore the standard assumption and take the physics approach to building. What is limited by physics? We can do many things with physics, all things we see today in some way or form is due to physics.

>>11624657
And when that shit meets reality and is jank, inefficient garbage, nobody wants it.

Mecha aren't even an engineering idea, really. They're just a storytelling contrivance so you can have conflicts play out personably and relatably despite sci fi scales.

Some of you are alright, don't check Elon Musk's twitter account and watch the chances that we ever leave this planet dwindle. What a fucking idiot.

>mini mecha
>remotely operated by professional teams
>engage with real weapons on mini battlefields
Would this work? Why are we talking about mecha anyway?

>>11624706
fuck off

>>11624689
>Mecha aren't even an engineering idea, really. They're just a storytelling contrivance so you can have conflicts play out personably and relatably despite sci fi scales.
Too true.

>>11624704
Seems like you're the idiot here. lol

>>11624706
Spess Mecha: >>11623904

>>11624704
jesus christ

>>11624704
>>>/reddit/
Fucking reddit idiots need to neck themselves.

>>11624704
Elon misses the SEC folks. This is his way of setting up dates with them.

>>11624706
APCs in combat has been a thing for a long time, anon.

>>11624711
>Spess Mecha
he's talking about the Artemis program, it's a lot of orbital rendezvous

>>11624704
wonder what drugs he's on today

>>11624729
Irregardless it sparked the mecha discussion.

>>11624747
Looks like redpills.

>>11624638
I mean in lower gravity, more rugged environments, legs begin to make more and more sense as opposed to wheels.
I'm picturing something specialised for traversing the surface and interior of asteroids being an octopus type thing

>>11624721
I've constantly defended him but at this point I would support the SEC taking his twitter account from him. It's one thing to say that you thought the share price of your company was too high in the past, it's another thing entirely to say that it's too high currently and then watch as it loses billions of dollars within a few minutes. This isn't 4d space chess, there's no reason for this meltdown.

>>11624726
yet we still don't have competitive tournaments and stream it, like how the Romans used to have kickass naval battles in the Colosseum

>>11624772
Wait, that's the issue? Lmao, he's said Tesla stock is too high before, never mattered. I do support taking his twatter from him, though.

>>11624788
I'll extend your support. I support taking twatter away from everyone online. Heck, I support taking facebook, instagram, youtube, reddit away from everyone.

>>11624772
The only reason that I can come up with to defend him on that tweet is he's playing 4D chess to be forcibly removed from Tesla.

>>11624788
Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. was a mistake

4d chess play right there

>I am selling almost all physical possessions. Will own no house.
>Tesla stock price is too high imo
>Now give people back their FREEDOM
what an absolute fucking madlad

>>11624704
>says he will sell all his possessions to save a company he loves because the local government are overreacting and strangling it to death thus exposing his passion for his life's work
>this is a bad thing
If his companies survive hopefully he will realize setting up in commifornia was a mistake and move East.

>>11624808
wasn't he already planning Giga T E X A S

>>11624804
In b4 he moves into a leftover Starship tank in Boca Chica, focuses entirely on starship development and starts flinging his faeces at reporters who get too close.

>>11624787
We do, but they also end up being tanks in the end.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkbAcwYix7I

>>11624804
Why sell? He needs to fling the rest of his cars to deep space on Starship.

>>11624808
Sometimes I wonder if this economic shut down due to corona is some ploy to jumpstart the automation revolution.

>>11624797
>"global warming causes pirate activity" scientists say
That's the type of journalism going on in that image.

>>11624820
well he 's already spent half his life living on couches in the offices and factories, this is just the next logical step lmao

So what are the odds the launch happens on the 27th?

>>11624834
50/50

>>11624829
He's just selling his personal physical possessions because he has no need for them, probably. He can rent Tesla cars/jet/spacex house/etc. Personal possession is for poor people. Rich people fulfilled their lives.

>>11624797
>wipes out billions in TSLA value through twitter
wait he's just trying to tank the price again to buy more of the stock back whilst things are shit isn't he

>>11624833
Diogenes of Boca Chica.

Next DM2 briefing in 5 minutes.

>Baby due on Monday
ah, I see what's happening

>>11624788
>Lmao, he's said Tesla stock is too high before
That's not the same, he was talking about it being too high in the past after it dropped significantly. This new tweet actually dropped the share price.

Imagine being a Tesla employee, you could get paid more elsewhere or have an easier job but you believe in what you're doing and you get stock options that make up for your lower salary. Then Elon one day decides to spit in your face and deliberately tank the stock for no reason. SpaceX is privately held but the same thing applies, he just fucked over his employees.

>>11624851
Link?

>>11624834
99% chance for launch ATTEMPT on that date but they will be treating it with kid gloves though. If the weather turns or something looks even the slightest bit off they will scrub.

>>11624833
now he's basically living either in his jet or at boca chica across from the taco trucks
wonder what the grimes baby will grow up like in that sort of 'household'

>>11624855
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21X5lGlDOfg

>>11624854
>after it dropped significantly
No, he tweeted it ~700+ shares. Then it climbed to 900+ before crashing to 600ish, then back up now.

>>11624854
>This new tweet actually dropped the share price.
lol you are a moron, anon

what an actual psychopath

>>11624797
lol the SEC is going to bitch

>>11624859
American fuck yeah!

>>11624823
bros

full sized tanks

with melee weapons

Can't stand the reddit shit derailment.

>>11624859
Neat. Started now.

>>11624859
Q&A's? Some Ameribro ask them if further mission contracts using manned Dragon 2's are being planned beyond the ISS.

>>11624891
They usually use #AskNASA on Twitter for the normies. Not sure if it's in use for this.

>>11624879
Already a thing,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP8KjbXuP8Y

>>11624861
No, this was during the coronavirus sell off and he wasn't specifically talking about TSLA. The share price at this time was $200 less than what it was before the selloff and it didn't move it at all because he said WAS too high, that isn't the same thing.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1237113508610924545
>>11624866
>This new tweet actually dropped the share price.
That's a fact. His investors sold off because they are worried that he is out of his god damn mind.

>>11624891
Just tweet at them

>>11624031
>The first phase of denialism. Just straight up "won't happen". Then when we have Starships en route to Mars with mining and ore processing on board it'll be "w-well sure it's happening, I never said it WON'T happen, this is different".
The first phase of denialism. Just straight up "it just need money". Then 20 years later when the unique Starship is barely reliable enough for one moon-trip to study human health it will be "w-well sure it's hard, I never said it was just money, this is different".

>Had this discussion before
Yet you still didn't learn basic economy lesson like the Silver Thursday or the petrol right now, given away because the demand crumbled.
Buyers will guess easily how much it cost you to get your platinum, they'll also know if you have loan to repay. So if you don't make honest offer they can afford to wait you out.
It won't be an ancap fantasy where no one can do anything against your "clever" scheme.

And get your silly scenario streight: Mining stuff on Mars can only be part of a colonization effort, bringing ores wouldn't be profitable without an economic system so monopolistic the anarchist will beg for a organization to take full control.

Ready for you to switch to the childish "colonization is the market" because you are in denial of how much research we still need to make self-sustaining habitat.

>>11624861
It rose for an hour and fell for an hour, the market has lag.

Apparently a lot of people who own tesla stock don't know he's manic but so far it hasn't caused any real disasters yet

>>11624934
Its also important for him to curb the enthusiasm people have for Tesla. Too much enthusiasm can lead to bubble and Elon doesn't want that happening.

>>11624921
I'll give you your (You) for effort, but this is one big not an argument so I'm not going to bother

>>11623967
>If you somehow managed to flood Earth with space gold and rare ore their prices would plummet unless the demand increase.

>The barrier to entry and the monopoly on space resource would make a mockery of free market and our economic system.

These aren't compatible. If you have a monopoly on space resources you undercut the cheapest terrestrial resource price, it wouldn't crash unless competition in space caused a price war.

Also crashing the price of something is bad in the short term but ultimately the point of economic advancement. You increase the purchasing power of everyone and they can buy more goods and serves for less money which means less work for the same thing.

>>11624704
HAHAHHAHAH what the fuck. I love this guy. SEC????????

>>11624952
Rather I think the real product will simply be made in space for people in space/low gravity planets/moons.

What's the atlantic going to ask this time?

>>11624934
The tweet dropped it about 6% to 10% compared to Nasdaq 100, which is the red line on this chart. The arrow marks when he tweeted. Elon fucked and employees and investors for no reason.

>>11624973
No, he fucked short term investors wanting quick cash. That's whats driving up the hyped up prices.

>>11624973
fucked his*

>>11624942
If you are that anon, no surprise you didn't learn basic economy then. It's because of irrational dreamer that human progress so slowly toward space. They keep lying about how hard the tasks are, they pretend it can be done with a miracle technology they read on the internet, then argue against any of the first steps to learn the technology.
Without them NASA would get a stable budget to actually develop the tech, they wouldn't need to promise flag planting and would be trying multiple model of reusable rockets.

>>11624979
Can you get any more schizo? It seems like you'll hang yourself with any amount of rope I give you so here's another (You), go at it

>>11624976
It's still some really sketchy stuff, and he just talked about selling all his possessions. Which include stock in tesla. Funny guy, i'd love to load up more tesla under 400.

>>11624973
Depends on if it goes back up

If it does, that means flakes got replaced by opportunists

Also some real life advice, don't take stock as compensation from your employer. If the company goes under you lose your job and the stock. It's increased risk for no additional return

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/investigation-alert-schall-law-firm-163300209.html?.tsrc=rss

lol

>>11624997
>he just talked about selling all his possessions. Which include stock in tesla
Either you're dumb and can't read or you've bought into the fake news. He only said physical possessions. Examples he gave was his houses.

>>11624997
he specifically said "physical possessions"

>>11625001
Exactly this tells me its just short term investers who want to make quick cash and drive up the prices for a pump/dump.

>you umm have umm this umm state of umm the art umm spacecraft umm ummm mm mmumum
lol

>>11625009
you have this state of the art spacecraft .

Fixed for brainlets

>>11624976
He fucked all his investors. It will have a lasting impact in share price because there is now even more doubt about his mental stability. His employees are constantly selling their stocks when they vest and converting them to cash, they're now going to get less for them.
>>11625000
If it goes back up, it doesn't mean that it wouldn't be higher if he never tweeted this. He basically helped put a top on the share price and anything past this point will be more likely to be considered overvalued because that's the opinion of the chief executive himself.
>If it does, that means flakes got replaced by opportunists
The real winners are people who are betting against his companies which he helped today.

>>11625009

>>11625009
Elon teaches public speaking classes at SpaceX.

>>11625001
>NOO, STOCK CAN'T HAVE VOLATILITY! THINK OF THE INVESTERINOS!
>haha twitter go tweet

>>11624299
>And may I remind you that in-orbit refuelling is still science fiction. I don't know why /sci/ has put so much faith in a system which hinges on a technology that doesn't currently exist.
Anon, reusable boosters were also just a childhood sci-fi meme once. As long as it's not too outlandish (I.E. warp travel), it's likely it'll be accomplished within a reasonable timeframe.

>>11625004
>>11625005
You're right. Still gonna get investigated lol.

>>11625008
This guy is literally acting against the interest of shareholders.

>>11625015
Yup. Now anyone buying at over 750 dollars is literally going against the CEOs own valuation of the company.

>>11625015
>He fucked all his short term stock stock pumpers

>>11625024
No, if the company is overvalued at 700 ACCORDING TO THE LITERAL CEO. Who's gonna buy there?

brainlet here, why would he want to lower the price? that means he has lower assets to put back into reinvestment right

>>11625024
https://www.youtube.com/post/UgwFyw72g0UhBkojWT14AaABCQ

Read the comments lol. Lots of newbies got fucked.

>>11625027
Only long term investors. Short term stock pumpers are not investors. They're manipulating the stock and screwing over long term investors.

>>11625031
Short term manipulation create bubble stocks. Bubble stock will crash and cause harm to innocent/new investors who think they're going to be rich in short term. It happens all the time in shitty penny stocks where manipulation of stocks happen and then its dumped when it peaks. This causes the crash of many small companies as they can't survive the volatility.

>>11625037
On top of that, due to high volatility of Tesla stocks due to vast amount of short term trade, it hurts Tesla stock more due to investors viewing the stock as a gamble instead of an investment.

commenters obsessed with the suits

>>11624979
Stop getting your world view from your ass

NASA was ready to do everything we wanted in our back yard. The nixon administration and succeeded administrations decided to pull funding and only pay for things that immediately effect national life. I know because nixon said so. The problem has always been the executive directive and lack of money. The reason NASA doesn't get the money is everyone else wants it and NASA has the least to offer to politicians.

The public's expectations about the difficulty of space travel has no effect whatsoever. Aspirational laymen have only ever asked that NASA gets more money and even if they aren't enthused about conservative development they aren't writing senators to stop it and they wouldn't listen anyway.

And it depends, the way NASA gets more money is having something to offer, which is usually satisfying special interests which is why we are in the mess we are now with multi state jobs programs and life support for boeing.

>>11625037
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1256257634404937730?s=20

Holy shit this guy.
They aren't screwing long term investors. Lots of the people entering are retail who want to hold until 10k. This is popping that bubble

>>11625015
>If it goes back up, it doesn't mean that it wouldn't be higher if he never tweeted this.

If it goes back up in the short term it's just as safe an assumption that investors cooled off as it was that they flaked in the first place

>In addition, I find it notable that through price negotiations, and in accordance with NASA’s stated negotiation position, Blue Origin’s final proposal contained a price reduction in excess of $300M for the base period of performance without any corresponding change to its technical or management approach.
Did BO nearly swindle NASA of 300 million in its bid?

>>11625031
There's zero reason for him to want to lower the price. If he wanted to pick up more shares, he could have done it a month ago when the stock was half the price it is now. His payout for being CEO is dependent on how high the share price is and if it stays above a certain amount. His agreement then lets him purchase shares at discount which he could then convert into cash if he wanted to.

>>11625048
>Don’t need the cash. Devoting myself to Mars and Earth. Possession just weigh you down.
he is ascending, the man's soul is the first to escape gravity

>>11625053
Rather NASA gave them money because "NATIONAL TEAM." Its a political money rather than anything.

>>11625055
Yup, and he is so close to getting to that next stock option payout.

>>11625044
Well it's quite different than any other ever worn. It's funny that it seems like it's always SpaceX guys getting asked the most. Elon, Gwynne, now Benji.

>>11625048
Diogenes of Boca Chica confirmed. Is he here shitposting with us?

estronaut is so fucking insufferable replying to every single elon tweet with some stupid shit. this isnt a /sfg/ post.

>>11625048
>media: how could elon be so irresponsible, and CRASH HIS STOCK PRICE GET OUT NOW

>>11625072
>also media: elon wants gov to lift lockdown so he can get richer, billionaire EVIL!!!

>>11625052
No, it could just mean that the share price is discounted enough that people are willing to buy despite Elon being batshit crazy. The only people he spooked were long term investors who are unwilling to put up with this shit. Most of the short term shareholders got out after earnings and anyone with short term calls already got fucked when it dropped from $860 to $760 before this tweet. Really, there's no defending this.

>>11625048
looks like he's had some kind of epiphany in the last 24hrs and just realized how much he really, really wants to get the fuck off this rock

>>11625092
He probably stumbled upon a flat earther video.

>>11625092
He wants to get off Earth and on to Mars. There he will build an empire and nuke Earth.

>>11624496
We also don't know how much it actualy costs them to launch a F9, we only know what the charge for it.
However we can assume that it is highly profitable for them at the current price as they can afford to launch the starlink settelites and build flying or exploding watertowers.

I'd say about 50% of what they charge is pure profit.

>>11625068
what do you expect
Once sojboi always a sojboi

>>11625100
>We also don't know how much it actualy costs them to launch a F9, we only know what the charge for it.
There was a livestream (that was deleted very quickly) that stated their F9 cost them $30m per launch.

>>11625092
I honestly think he wants to go full on hermit at Boca Chica. Won't be suprised if he steps down from ALL of his current positions and gets Gwynne to put him as CTO of Starship Development.

>>11625084
>No, it could just mean that the share price is discounted enough that people are willing to buy despite Elon being batshit crazy.
Who cares if the stock price is the same by tomorrow. One group traded for another.

>The only people he spooked were long term investors
That reacted in one hour when elon says weird shit on twitter all the fucking time? Lurk more

I'm not defending it, but forming opinions on short term volatility that's endemic to the stock market anyway is a waste of concern. If there's no rebound then you can complain about it. It's not a responsible thing to do either way, but no one here needs to be convinced that elon is an unhinged spontaneous dude.

>>11625110
Why would he give up his dream of going to Mars? Literally no one else on the planet can do it but him, as shown by the fact that there are no one else on the planet, no organization, no country, no company besides his own that has any plans for humans on mars.

>>11625107
big if true

>>11624556
Technicly the Delta IV heavy can also launch some 10 tons into a lunar transfee orbit.
Practicly it's way more expensive and has a far too slow launch frequency.
And with SLS the launch frequency would be too low and the costs of it are just insane.

>>11625125
I meant that he realizes he no longer has the time or energy to do Tesla, Boring, Neuralink, and even some SpaceX stuff like DragonXL all at once. He'll be dedicating his entire time and resources for Starship to finally leave for Mars.

>>11625143
He literally said that his only goal is to acquire assets on Earth so he can go to Mars. Tesla batteries/solar, Boring tunnel, Neuralink, SpaceX are all for Mars. He'd likely give off/sell all his Earthly possessions once Mars colony is established (hopefully) within his life. He has roughly 20-30 years left of functioning brain.

>>11624797
He's acting like an idiot. What's gotten into him?

>>11623190
Space HAVE SE-X.

>>11625149
That's the rational thing to do. Sell when you're ready to go there. Musk's idea of rational is more than likely different.

>>11625153
realized he broke his agreement with the SEC and is throwing a fire sale so he doesn't have any assets they can go after

>>11625121
>Who cares if the stock price is the same by tomorrow. One group traded for another.
Most of the long term investors who wants the share price to retain perceived value and support higher prices in the future. This is the type of volatility no one wants to see and is highly damaging to investor relations.
>That reacted in one hour when elon says weird shit on twitter all the fucking time? Lurk more
Elon has never done anything this stupid, at least not publicly. Smoking a blunt was minor, calling someone a pedo in a personal dispute may have been in poor taste but not overly damaging to his companies. This time he deliberately crashed his own stock for no reason and the people supporting his companies, including his own employees, have literally lost billions of dollars in value within an hour.
>no one here needs to be convinced that elon is an unhinged spontaneous dude.
He's unhinged and lost the ability to control his emotions. No rational person would have done this.

>>11625157
t.

>>11624797
>implying tweets have anything to do with the market

>>11625169
>Most of the long term investors who wants the share price to retain perceived value and support higher prices in the future
Only if the valuation is correct. Long terms investors have never liked pump/dump schemes that's so common with Tesla stocks due to a very strong anti-Telsa base. Volatile stock is never in the interest of long term stockholders.

>>11625190
They absolutely can

>>11625195
no and the media should know better

>>11625191
This is retarded. The "pump and dump" gave longs 3x or 9x their money. This excessive valuation is in their interests.

>>11625201
Idiot. The tweet just moved TSLA down 10%. If the CEO doesn't have faith in the companies valuation. Why should you?

>>11625183

>>11624904
>That's a fact. His investors sold off because they are worried that he is out of his god damn mind.
lol you are a moron, anon

>Elon - "OPEN UP THE FUCKING ECONOMY ALREADY"
>Everyone - "HE'S AN EVIL CAPITALIST!"
>Elon - "Fuck you I don't care, Tesla stock is overpriced Imma sell everything and go live in a fucking collapsed starship tank! Just open up the fucking economy already!"
>Everyone - "HE'S AN EVIL MARKET MANIPULATOR! GET HIM!"

>>11624973
>The tweet dropped it
lrn2economics, Newsberg.

>>11625207
Bull fucking shit.
The only thing driving stock value is something that we dont know about.
Seeing how he is talking about selling his shit only means (if he is serious) something really went south money wise for him or for his companies.
Again the tweets have nothing to do with it.

>>11625023
>This guy is literally acting against the interest of shareholders.
You are delusional and your 1st language is Chinese.

>>11625046
This doesn't change what I said. At the time NASA outlived its usefulness the objective of the space race was to get nuclear ICBM and a major ideological victory. The technology of the time was only good for missiles, comm/spy satellite and scientific probes, nothing else was reasonable.
Today we could have a few breakthrough if the minimum budget was met. It's not because budget is STILL dependent on president trying to milk the next flag planting.

You think public expectation has no effect because the current dogma that NASA is a waste of money unless it's Apollo 2.0 already ran everyone trust into the ground, even SpaceX superb renewable rocket struggle to rise hope because they exaggerate the same way about getting to the Moon/Mars.
It's only a recent trend that started promoting more reasonable research, take Chris Hadfield YT video.

And now the current government is antiscience, willing to shut down anything that doesn't produce good economic numbers or contradict the president.

>>11625207
I can't imagine being as dumb as you, if you truly believe what you are selling.

>buh muh tweeties pooh!!!
LOL! Fuck off.

>>11625191
Most of the long term investors never believed there was a pump and dump scheme or that it was overvalued, otherwise they would have started selling at high prices and waited for a correction, that's basic money management. I don't know why you're finding it so hard to believe that this is a major fuck up, go to any site that has discussion for Tesla investors, we're all seething right now.
>>11625215
At least I'm not stupid enough to dispute a fact by calling someone a moron without even attempting to explain why I have that belief.
>>11625221
That is exactly what happened. That tweet created panic selling as people lost their faith in the company and its leadership. Usually TSLA trades much closer to the Nasdaq.

Last DM-2 briefing today with the crew starts now.

>>11625203
Pump/dump only generate negative news and harm the company's stability. Going from 500 to 900 then back to 500 then back to 800 then back down to 500, is not a long term investor dream. LMAO. For long term investors, that's $0 growth.

Your "3x or 9x" money is for short term pump/dump manipulators. That also ignores the "3x or 9x" loss as well.

>>11625230
Buy NIO

>>11625225
Markets move off expectations of future earnings. Not illuminati shit. This tanked because people are realizing Elon is unstable.

>>11625238
His tweet didn't affect anything. Keep taking your red-painted bluepills, they suit you.

>>11625238
>we're all seething right now.
>we
kek.

interviewing bob and doug:
https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1YqGoQQmdgMxv

>>11625214
impressive effort for a shitpost, i'll give you that

>>11625243
>investors caring about tweets
Have you seen Trumps twitter? lol

>>11625214
Try your hardest, anon.

>>11625225
>if he is serious

You're literally just newfag at this point

>>11625243
Market goes up, Market goes down. Can't explain shit.

>>11625256
if you say so bud

>>11625257
>>11625265
Most of the time they are informed where it will go. Musk is just irked by that so he did some tweeter shenanigans over it.

>some anon thinks twitter caused it
BWAHAHAHAHA!

>>11625216
No he's been acting like a retard these past days. I don't know what's gotten into him they should take away his phone.

>>11625268
He acts "retarded" every month. Yet he delivers. What does that say about your assessment?

>>11625252

>>11625268
I've always viewed websites like twitter the same way as I view youtube video comments. It is all bullshit and no one in their right mind should lend any credence to them.

>acting like a retard these past days
>musk
Oh, you're new. That explains a lot. lol

>>11625241
Longs bought in 2016 or so. Anyone buying now is someone who accepts the volatility.

>>11625271
Not in a long time though. His corona bullshit and now the rambling are just bizarre

>>11625273
hearty chuckle, lad

>>11625244
>His tweet didn't affect anything
Except it did and the lawsuits have already started coming in. Undoubtedly there will be an SEC investigation because of his violation of his fiduciary duties as chief executive.
>>11625245
Yes, I'm a shareholder. The Elon Internet Defence Force(EIDF) here probably isn't and they'll constantly defend him regardless of his actions. Grimes is having her baby on Monday while Elon is melting down on twitter and saying that he is going to sell all his possessions and that he no longer needs money. Epic meme.

>>11625257
More likely its not because of this tweet itself, but rather Elon questioning the narrative about covid that's being told by the media. Elon/Media never go well together. They've been after him ever since his first Roadster.

>>11625250
Trump pumped oil 30% when he tweeted he thought there was gonna be an OPEC+ deal.

>>11625257
>>11625266
Lol you have no clue.

>>11625288
That's your problem brah. You bought a stock without questioning/researching properly. You bought one of the most volatile stock right now and you're mad its volatile.

>>11625288
https://stocktwits.com/symbol/TSLA

Really funny stuff.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk
Oh shit.

He deleted his twitter bio with all the companies he owns. He's gonna do it!!!!

talk about space you fucks

>>11625288
>Yes, I'm a shareholder.
*inhales*

Bob and Doug's excellent machine.

>>11625327
getting shades of kurt russel in the stargate movie from doug
excited for dragon to fall into a wormhole

Anyone buying TSLA after it's 300% run-up gets what they deserve, regardless of any Elon stunts. It was over priced at 250$ a share, why the fuck are people buying it at 700$? Fools and their money etc.

>>11625313
>Elon this morning
lost

>>11625322
thread is 404ing
make new thread

>>11625337
page 3 dude

>>11625302
This wasn't due to a lack of research on my part and I'm still bullish on the stock. No one predicted that Elon would tank his own stock for no reason by saying that the price was too high when it was already weak. You can pretend you could because 'zomg he is so wacky, anything can happen, brah', but you would just be lying and you are talking about a subject you know nothing about.
>You bought one of the most volatile stock right now and you're mad its volatile.
No, I love volatility , particularly upside volatility. What I don't like is a deliberate attempt to crash a stock by a chief executive of a company.
>>11625324
I've made at least 40-50 thousand off TSLA. It could drop to zero and I would have still made money.

>>11625342
>No one predicted that Elon would tank his own stock
You didn't predict Elon's tweet could be controversial and affect his stock?
>This wasn't due to a lack of research on my part
I don't believe you.

>>11625322
Um sweetie, this is stock fights general. You've seem to have come to the wrong place.

>>11625344
>Gene Wilder
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5QGkOGZubQ

YOU GET NOTHING. YOU LOSE.

Tesla has been a bad influence on Musk's mental health.

>>11625342
>"I've made at least 40-50 thousand off TSLA. It could drop to zero and I would have still made money." t. anon posting on the space related basket weaving form

>>11625234
>This doesn't change what I said.
Then don't respond to what we agree on

>It's not because budget is STILL dependent on president trying to milk the next flag planting.
You're saying we need a president interested in flag planting for a budget?

>You think public expectation has no effect because the current dogma that NASA is a waste of money unless it's Apollo 2.0 already ran everyone trust into the ground
No, I don't even know what you're talking about, but that wasn't in my post.

>blue origin gets 500m for lunar lander
>spacex 130 mil
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

>>11625346
>You didn't predict Elon's tweet could be controversial and affect his stock?
That isn't what we are talking about. This isn't a case of him calling someone a pedo or going after the media. This was an intentional self destruction.
>I don't believe you.
I don't care what you think. I have over a hundred hours researching just Tesla alone, it's the majority of my portfolio since I bought it at $220 around this time last year and have taken enough profit that most of my shares are basically free.

There's a full video & audio of DM-1 and IFA from inside the cabin. SpaceX release it already.

>>11625364
>blue origin gets 500m
Split four ways with Draper, Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin.

>>11625364
>oldspace get typical oldspace money like always
>spaceX gets enough to build 50,000 Starship crumply tin can prototypes, for free

>>11625234
The Apollo program rocket hardware was never relevant to ICBMs.

>>11625364
>implying that SpaceX needs $500M to make a lander that outshines everyone else's

>>11625364
And yet starship is going to dab all over those old space losers.

>>11625364
less is better. More likely to get past the second round.

>>11625364
>>11625373
They all received ten months worth of funding for their various landers. SpaceX is already developing Starship so they don't really need much funding and the lower amount could have increased their chances of being selected.

>>11625365
>it's the majority of my portfolio
I think it's amusing that someone who owns tesla stock is trying to convince anons that probably don't own tesla stock that the price drop was really bad and spells a bad future for the investment. Ok? Get out. Right or wrong you're only ingraining your current psychology by arguing here and it doesn't make a difference what happens to the people you are arguing with. You're getting too close to the material. Dispassionately analyze your investments.

>>11625373
>>11625381
>>11625385
>>11625387
I love how optimistic you guys are
my money on old space

>>11625394
My money is on spaceX finishing starship first but not getting in humanrated in time and because of that the blue origin bid will go go first.

>>11625404
starship doesn't need to be human rated (exactly) to be a lunar lander

>>11625394
Space flight is heading to good times. Hard not to be optimistic about it.

>>11625409
NASA is asking for crewed lunar landers....

>>11625404
>bides his time

>>11625421
human rated for earth launches and rated for moon descent and ascent are very different things.

>>11625393
Why is that amusing? I'm trying to explain to people who don't understand this subject why this specifically is bad for his companies only to receive stupid replies about how this tweet couldn't have affected it and baseless denial fueled by people who worship Elon Musk like a God.
>Right or wrong you're only ingraining
I'm not ingraining anything beyond reality. Nearly every investor and those betting against the stock would agree with me that this tweet was terrible for the share price.
>Dispassionately analyze your investments.
I'm not analyzing anything here, I'm discussing something. It's so curious how people who cannot even beat the market, if they have any investments they manage at all, always have some opinion on what everyone else is doing wrong.

>>11625445
>Why is that amusing?
I explained in the sentence right after. The stakes are high for you, low for everyone else.

>Nearly every investor and those betting against the stock would agree with me that this tweet was terrible for the share price.
ad populum. Yeah, you aren't analyzing anything.
>It's so curious how people who cannot even beat the market, if they have any investments they manage at all, always have some opinion on what everyone else is doing wrong.
Yet you care intensely what they believe and want to change their mind. Your confoundment is my amusement.

>>11623190
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8BR8AHoE6w

thread theme

It's going to look ridiculous attached to Orion.

>>11625487
Imagine the "So the big spacecraft is the one that's worth a billion dollars?" reactions.

>>11625487

>>11625473
>ad populum
Your whole argument is a fallacy argument. You're somehow upset that I refuted your stupid argument about this not affecting the share price, now you've resorted to claiming that my posts amuse you without actually saying anything relevant. What's your actual point?
>Yet you care intensely what they believe and want to change their mind.
I don't care that much, if someone responds to me with something that is objectively wrong, I'll correct them. You don't care about who is right, otherwise you would have stopped posting after I proved you wrong, you only care about appearing to be right and saving your bruised ego. You can be amused all you want, I'm amused by your stupidity, yet I don't constantly state that and act like it means anything.

>>11625501
I'm not that anon. My only argument was that you are getting emotional and it's going to cloud your financial judgement. And then another one is you're in denial. You've been responding to this topic for a long time, you clearly care too much.

Are you going to sell or hold?

>>11625359
If we agreed on everything why did you even post?
You seemed to believe your post was contradicting mine, so I went on to explain it wasn't relevant.

>You're saying we need a president interested in flag planting for a budget?
Quite the opposite, IMHO we need a president who care about getting science done and give a stable budget. Previous presidents claimed to be interested in flag planting for the bump in popularity it brought then discretely cut the budget later as it inevitably turned out unfeasible during their mandate.

>No, I don't even know what you're talking about, but that wasn't in my post.
>>11625046 >>The public's expectations about the difficulty of space travel has no effect whatsoever
So I'm explaining to you,
When public is told repeatedly "Mars for 2020" then 2030 and see it never ready (because it's harder than they were told) they end up thinking NASA is a waste of money, and since NASA don't have a stable budget they were forced to pretend we can do it using older off-the-bin technology, rarely experimenting with new stuffs.
Closing the loop with the next president not giving a real budget because no one believe it anymore.

Now the financially irresponsible SpaceX CEO gave engineers a stable budget and they developped something new. It's nowhere reliable for their big project and no one raise their hope anymore because of all the previous lies.

>>11625375
Read better, the space race was a race for new rocket engines and nuclear missiles technology, Apollo was for an ideological victory over the Soviet.
Anyone serious should know that.

Did Elon watch Pewdiepie's Diogenes videos?

>>11625541
>When public is told repeatedly "Mars for 2020" then 2030
I remember when it was "Mars for 2010".