/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11672924
>MTF

More like "trannyship", amirite?

First for strategically stupid frogposting.

>>11672924
>male to Female fusion rocket
god dammit keep your perv shit out of space

>>11672914
I'm not sure if you're implying something here

>>11672934
>>11672932
Magnetized Target Fusion

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist3.php#thiomtf

But yes it desperately needs a better name.

>>11672933
Based.

Remember to exercise. No skinnyfat spergs in space.

>>11672933
You could definitely get a pepe to orbit for a few grand. High altitude balloon launch and homemade solids.

>>11672936

Hydrogen rockets aren't EFFECTIVE, regardless of cost. Hydrogen limits the material selection allowed due to causing embrittlement of most metals, hydrogen is extremely low density to the point that it actually counteracts the majority of the gains you'd otherwise get from the Isp improvement it provides, hydrogen's low density means you need a larger turbopump to move the same propellant mass, and hydrogen fueled engines in general have worse thrust to weight ratios than engines fueled by anything else.

All of these factors together mean that a purely hydrolox propelled launch vehicle capable of launching the same mass as a kerolox or methalox or hypergolic launch vehicle will be MUCH larger than any of those other vehicles, meaning it will take more time and resources to construct, and will therefore cost more. The Isp of hydrolox is effectively a siren's song which has lured many an engineer.

>>11672979
Hydrolox belongs in zero-g construction.

>Upcoming launches
16 May - Atlas V - X-37B
17 May - Falcon 9 - Starlink 7
20 May - H-IIB - HTV-9 to ISS
27 May - Falcon 9 - Dragon 2 to ISS
30 May - Electron - some cubesats
?? May - Long March 2F - Chinese space plane

MTF:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRL1lS6kKmg

HOP WHEN?

>>11672988
is the Dragon - ISS launch crewed or cargo?

>>11673011
Crewed. This is DM-2.

Given the low price of a Starship, certain "research" opportunities could become realistic to fund.
What if to get a human rating for the passenger Starship, we sent up one filled with cats. 100 cameras streaming in 1080p the various compartments, access to the main streams is free but if you want access to rest it's 5$. 25$ lets you broadcast a message throughout the ship. Various screens can display ads for sponsors, viewers can override the default sponsor by paying 50-100$ per minute per screen, can display their own ad or whatever in that time. Paying 250$ releases some wired toy into the main room for cats to catch. 1000$ and a live mouse is released from a cage. 5000$ and a large rat is released to battle the cats.
Would be entertaining to watch cats murder a mouse live in 0g.

>>11673011
Demo-2 mission, first crewed flight

>>11673012
>>11673019
sick tits

>>11672932
Netorare ship is better

>>11672996
Damn, that animation was so amateurish I was convinced it was an official release from an aerospace company

>>11673016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdRukUmNzB4

>>11672936
NASA builds hydrolox rockets because they're expensive, it goes both ways.

>NASA should go back to building kerosene rockets, unironically

>>11672924
At a certain level of interplanetary trade, won't it make sense to build a nuclear-electric spacecraft that starships will dock with and be transported by to mars. It could have artificial gravity rings and larger spaces to make the 3 month journey less shit.

The vastly higher isp electric thrusters could mean that it would actually be cheaper to use, as less propellant would have to be lofted into orbit for each trip.

>>11673045
NASA should never build another rocket again, at least not for launch. It's kind of ridiculous when you think about it, they're basically a research institute at this point and being asked to take on a practical engineering challenge in a competitive field.

>>11673062
Not just Mars, it makes sense to have an orbital port around every planet or moon and have dedicated space-only craft. Trying to haul your habs on a booster even with TSTO from Earth is super dumb.

>>11673062
>>11673070
I cant wait for black op research bases on the dark side of the moon.

NSWR testing when?

>>11672934
>>11673087
Can't wait to ride a black MTF all the way to Mars

>>11673087
>I cant wait for black op research bases on the dark side of the moon.
Or ground sized telescopes with zero atmospheric distortion.

>>11673045
No, have you been following the thread? Densified propalox is the way forward, every advantage of kerolox with none of the disadvantages.

>>11673062
Propellant costs NOTHING
Spaceships cost EVERYTHING
You're proposing we build a giant fuck-off spaceship instead of launching more propellant, that will NEVER be a cheaper option.

>>11672924
Magnetically induced long-lived fusion

>>11673108
"The spaceship is the cost" is expendable logic. Starship is stupid cheap as a rocket before you factor in reusability, but that's not the only way you can make a rocket work. Over sufficient usage cycles, a rocket is primarily the price of maintenance and fuel. Plus you have to factor in market - an artificial gravity seat is essentially a your luxury liner trip to Mars compared to the pack-em-in practical option of Starship, so they occupy different markets.

>>11673108
t. ULA sales rep

SLS LAUNCH DATE SET

>NASA has finally set a new launch date for the oft-delayed first flight of its Space Launch System rocket. The formal date should be announced next week, a senior engineer at the agency said.

>During a committee meeting of NASA's Advisory Council, Tom Whitmeyer said the launch date would be "towards the end of next year." This mission, dubbed Artemis I by NASA, is seen as the agency's first step back toward the Moon. The uncrewed test flight, which will last between 26 and 42 days, will insert Orion into a lunar orbit before the deep space capsule returns to Earth.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/05/space-launch-system-rocket-now-targeted-for-a-late-2021-launch/

>>11673149
Oh boy can't wait for next summer when it'll be postponed to late 2022.
Someone just find the biggest fucking redwood in California, cut it down, remove the branches and sharpen it into a giant motherfucking stake and drive it through the propellant tank.

>>11673132
Both systems are reusable in the case I described, you're just not ever gonna make your money back that you spend building your giant space-only space ship. It's cheaper to design and build a single type of spacecraft, and just refuel it in orbit to go to Mars or wherever is within its delta V capacity, than it is to develop both your reusable launch vehicle AND a reusable space-only interplanetary ferry (which would require two years to slowly thrust to Mars using electric propulsion anyway, whereas your refueled Starship style vehicle can get there in 4 months).

Large ships will make sense for going to Saturn and beyond, and maybe even Jupiter as well. In those cases the need for more delta V would mean you can't use refueling alone anyway.

>>11673149
>"towards the end of next year."
Gonna just circle that date on my calendar, one sec

>>11673149
>towards the end of next year
OH NO NO NO NO

What's the Starship SN that they'll have made by then, 20? Including several SH prototypes?

>>11673149
A
Fucking
Decade

>>11673176
>you're just not ever gonna make your money back that you spend building your giant space-only space ship
Not with that attitude.

>>11673149
>towards the end of next year
ITS ON THE FUCKING TEST STAND RIGHT NOW! WHY THE HELL IS IT GOING TO TAKE OVER A YEAR TO TEST FIRE THE ROCKET AND THEN LAUNCH IT?! OVER A DECADE OF DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>>11673108
>propellant costs NOTHING
unless you're using high test peroxide lol

>>11673179
Something like that. Starship will fly this year uncrewed.

>>11673190
Also, remember that SpaceX wants to end up sending hundreds of Starships to Mars every two years, not very long after they get starship working (I think ten years was their goal for ramp up?). You're not gonna get that kind of throughput using any big orbital-assembly vehicle in that kind of time, or ever. You'd need to build hundreds, and even then your schedule is gonna go long because it's gonna take too much time to assemble all those vehicles in space vs just mass producing Starships on Earth.

>>11673191
they found leaks on the tank bro
gotta fix em first, probably found some other shit to fix too

we've just gotten used to the itemized progress/status updates on starship

>>11673176
>Both systems are reusable
Yeah, that's not the point. The point is the "spaceship" part of any reusable spaceship's cost becomes an increasingly insignificant factor of the overall cost the longer it's in operation.

>It's cheaper to design and build a single type of spacecraft, and just refuel it in orbit to go to Mars or wherever is within its delta V capacity, than it is to develop both your reusable launch vehicle AND a reusable space-only interplanetary ferry
As the ferryman you don't need to develop a reusable launch vehicle, that will already exist in the form of Starship and/or its descendants. All you need to worry about is your ferry.

>electric propulsion is low thrust
That part I agree with, I didn't propose the original nuclear electric idea and NTR makes more sense in this position.

>>11673176
I think you're underestimating a few things:
1) cheaper materials and lower maintanence if you don't have to aerobreak or launch
2) don't have to give a shit about aerodynamic design
3) larger, industrial life support, manufacturing and scientific systems
4) you can build a fuel tank as big as you want out of cheaper materials
obviously if the only space travel is planet-to-planet then these concerns no longer apply, but I don't think mankind is going to stop at the surface of Mars once the floodgates of affordable space travel are open

>>11673214
>you don't need to aerobrake bro, just use multiple stages of chemical propulsion it'll be fine bro don't worry about all that hardware you need to throw away bro

>>11673149
>spend billions of dollars engineering a rocket that HAS to work the first time around

>do A FUCKING DRY RUN anyway

>>11673225
Can't land don't mean can't aerocapture.

>>11673212
>A decade of development for a propellant tank that's leaky
Hydrogen is naturally leaky, so this leak must be pretty serious to halt the testing.

>>11673239
Diversity hires strike again.

>>11673196
My son, may I introduce you to diborane?

>>11673238
aerocapture is both more energy intensive than landing with aerodynamics and more difficult, especially on Mars fast transfers

>>11673225
rather throw away a cheap steel drum than deal with >>11673239

>>11673243
no, thank you I'm good

>>11673245
It's really not a big deal

>>11673243

>>11673213
>Yeah, that's not the point. The point is the "spaceship" part of any reusable spaceship's cost becomes an increasingly insignificant factor of the overall cost the longer it's in operation.
And with a ~4.5 year round-trip to Mars, your spaceship has no chance of doing enough flights to pay for itself before it becomes a money pit like the ISS, unless you jack the price through the roof.

Starship on the other hand can fly to Mars once right after the paint dries, and 3 years later once it comes back to Earth the now aged vehicle can be used to launch propellant into orbit a thousand times before being scrapped. That's where the reuse economics for Starship work. Any vehicle slated to go to Mars goes there one time, and afterwards gets reused either for Moon or LEO missions until it's worn out.

>>11673239
>>11673212
there are no leaks (yet)
there's just "concerns" of leaks because they have no 100% guarantee that it won't leak when the tanks get filled

>>11673028
meow

>>11673149
>SLS LAUNCH DATE SET
>Tom Whitmeyer said the launch date would be "towards the end of next year."
So definitely 2023 for sure.

>>11673259
>And with a ~4.5 year round-trip to Mars
The only way this works is if it's a torch ship that doesn't need to wait for launch windows.

>>11673246
what if we could recover our cheap steel drum, anon
>>11673251
stfu

>>11673277
>what if we could recover our cheap steel drum, anon
sure, save enough fuel to send it on the slow boat back to be reused

>>11673266
That's even more retarded.

>>11673214
>cheaper materials and lower maintanence if you don't have to aerobreak or launch
Steel is already the cheapest material imaginable for any space vehicle

>2) don't have to give a shit about aerodynamic design
Starship hardly cares about aerodynamics either, just the ability to remain in belly-flop position.

>3) larger, industrial life support, manufacturing and scientific systems
Why? Develop a Co2 scrubber module the size of a fridge and install three per manned Starship, carry your oxygen and discard your waste, use dehumidifiers to collect used water for filtration. Congrats you now have a life support system that can support 50 people for 5 years, because human metabolic needs are nothing compared to the payload capacity of Starship.

>4) you can build a fuel tank as big as you want out of cheaper materials
Already addressed that steel is as cheap as it gets, and we'll be able to build propellant tanks as large as we want on Earth, since 9m is as wide as you need to go. I'm saying that by launching more Starships you make everything cheaper, AND it's faster to get to Mars.

>>11673285
you haven't been paying attention at all, have you

>>11673259
> before it becomes a money pit like the ISS
The ISS is orbital garbage cludged together from an oldspace orgy and shaped by an era of astronomical $/kg launch costs. With reasonable launch costs and a singular vision you would have to pay a group of experts in order to develop something as shit as the ISS.

The one way it becomes relevant in the comparison is that the way a ferry like this could continue to take income when not en route is to serve as a temporary station. This is another way in which you can't directly compare it to Starship as they fill different niches.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2adl6LszcE

Was It autism?

>>11673277
>wah

>>11673288
to be clear, the "concern" for leaks did not cause any delay and the "end of next year" timeline is not because of delay (as far as we and reports can tell)
sls is just really slow

>>11673250
>>11673256
Aww, that's no way to have fun!

>>11673276
Nah, 2.25 years to spiral out to Mars on a continuous-thrust electric propulsion trajectory, spend minimal time after arrival shaking hands and dropping off cargo, then leave Mars to spiral back in towards Earth. Launch windows get really fucky when you stop using Hohmann transfers due to the super low thrust to weight ratio you get using electrics.

Mars cycler yes or no?

Human torpor/hibernation when? This whole living space for months en route shit sucks, need to be able to stack those niggas like sardines.

>>11673324
>Launch windows get really fucky when you stop using Hohmann transfers due to the super low thrust to weight ratio you get using electrics
Like I said you need a torch ship.

>>11673330
Human hibernation probably will not come without some drawbacks even when it's more or less 'perfected'. Months long journeys are way too short to justify it. Makes more sense for going to the outer planets.

>>11673299
As far as I can tell you're just saying words. What is your actual argument?

>>11673340
If you're too stupid that ain't my problem nigger

>>11673319
>5600K
Good way to emulate the fucking sun in your rocket.

>>11673332
No, dude. A torch ship produces high thrust to weight ratio AND can do continuous burns. We don't have anything like that, if we did we'd have people on 2 month trajectories to Pluto right now.

Solar electric forces you into continuous thrust trajectories with LOW thrust to weight ratio. They aren't torch ships. You also cannot use normal launch windows because it takes you 8 to 12 months just to apply the delta V you need to reach your destination. Since you're startign off so far away from the optimal window, you need to use much more delta V than you'd otherwise need to perform a Hohmann transfer, too. Basically, you need to start burning about a year ahead of the launch window in order to get into orbit of the Sun and accelerate the entire time you spiral out from the Sun, raising your altitude and slowly matching velocity with Mars, until you end up where Mars is just as you reach Mars' orbital speed.

I'm not talking about a brachistochrone, which is effectively the opposite; with that style of trajectory you spend most of your time on an interstellar escape trajectory because you have high thrust and can afford to spend half the time speeding up and half the time slowing down relative to your target.

>>11673347
Your other comment said nothing to refute my point, which was that Starship can take advantage of hundreds of reuses to drop its per-use cost down to effectively just propellant costs, whereas to use a large cycler or solar-electric ship to go to do the same few hundred flights would take a thousand years, and therefore is impossible.

>>11673373
>with a brachistochrone you spend most of your time on stellar escape
jeez, I hope your torch is reliable

>>11673336
Its not the time, its the space required. You could easily stack 1000 people in a starship as opposed to 100 max without, a 10x cheaper ticket.

>>11673373
>A torch ship produces high thrust to weight ratio AND can do continuous burns
Yes. That's the point at which space only starts making sense.

>>11673396
>you can't start playing the game until you've already won!
Starship will be fine for Mars and cislunar space
the Dynetics lunar lander will be perfect for the lunar surface if you can refuel it with Starship
it's all coming together

>>11673378
The Dawn space probe was not a torch drive. It used spiral trajectories to accomplish its transfer from Vesta to Ceres, an to adjust to a lower orbit around Ceres.
If you really think that a full throttle acceleration of 0.0000772 m/s^2 with an Isp of 3100s qualifies as a torch ship, you're an idiot.

>>11673405
please reread the post you're replying to, anon
I'm making a joke about engine failure flinging you out into interstellar space

>>11673396
I think I misinterpreted your first post here >>11673276

Did you mean that a big space-only spaceship makes sense only if we have torch drives? Or were you saying that a 4.5 year continuous propulsion round-trip from Mars requires a torch drive? I ask because it sounded like you meant the latter and that is VERY wrong, like the complete opposite of the truth. If you meant the former thing though, yes, a high specific power fission or fusion drive would in fact allow for very large space-only transport vehicles to make sense.

>>11673408
Sorry, I think I fucked up responding to someone else too. Not a lot of sleep last night, too busy crunching numbers for delta V relationships to Isp and mass ratios and jerking off

>>11673414
>Did you mean that a big space-only spaceship makes sense only if we have torch drives?
Yes.

>>11673336
If they find a fix for the whole cells ripping themselfs apart when freezing thing long term hybernation could be a thing.
When i talk about long term i talk about months, maybe a couple of years.
Didnt they find a mammal rat/mouse species not too long ago that survives getting frozen because of some kind of compound in it's body?
or was it a insect species?

>>11673427
Ok cool, I had big question marks floating around my head trying to understand how someone could think a torch drive would be needed to go to Mars and back in 4.5 years round trip.

>>11673434
Amphibian. There are multiple frog and toad species that freeze solid in the winter and when they that out in summer they're fine.

>>11673377
>Your other comment said nothing to refute my point, which was that Starship can take advantage of hundreds of reuses to drop its per-use cost down
My suggestion was to the now offloaded ferry with its significant artificial gravity space as a station while in orbit. You continue recouping your costs by continuing to provide a service when not en route.

> Starship can take advantage of hundreds of reuses to drop its per-use cost down
Once again, a meaningless comparison as the two are operating in completely different ways. There's no need for a Mars ferry to compete with a Starship doing Moon runs. You're talking yourself in circles.

And to be clear, that Mars route being such a small part of a Starship's life cycle contributes to it being a cost leader as well. The only job a Mars ferry would do is the most expensive one a Starship will ever do, and by doing so utilizing large artificial gravity habs you once again are in a completely different price bracket.

>whereas to use a large cycler or solar-electric ship
To be clear, I already explained I would've modified anon's original suggestion as an NTR. I don't see much of a future for electric propulsion in manned missions to or from Mars.

>>11673373
Ahem
the op pic
is a torchship capable drive, especially with some modern enhancements. MTF will fundamentally change the dynamics of spacetravel, and desu everything else

>>11673441
Yeah, now that i look it up your right.
And it's not only trying to keep your cells from ripping apart, for us humans at least you have to keep those synapses firing.
Keep the "current" going in your brain, to really dumb it down the human brain storage is like ram memory, it's all lost when it's not powered.
ofcourse we already know that this "current" last a lot longer then by example getting our oxygen supply cut off.

>>11673443
>You continue recouping your costs by continuing to provide a service when not en route
A station doesn't provide any service, though.
>There's no need for a Mars ferry to compete with a Starship doing Moon runs
But there is a need for the cost of fabricating, launching, and assembling the big ship to result in a lower ticket price than that of a transfer via Starship, and Starship has at least three other uses besides Mars missions wherein it can be rapidly reused and make enough money to offset its own construction costs into oblivion.
>The only job a Mars ferry would do is the most expensive one a Starship will ever do
There's no reason sending a Starship to Mars would need to be any more expensive than sending a Starship to LEO, because the Mars-bound Starship can pay for itself by doing LEO trips or Moon trips beforehand in short order.
>To be clear, I already explained I would've modified anon's original suggestion as an NTR
Sure, however that comes with its own problems. For one thing, NTR can't be reused very much, because the fuel elements become saturated with long lived neutron poisons (fission products which absorb neutrons far more readily than the fuel), and they also physically degrade. A nuclear thermal engine is one of those things that looks nice on paper but in reality has a lot of problems in the fine print. You could possibly, maybe get 24 hours of operation out of each NTR you installed, after which it'd be too degraded and the reactor wouldn't be producing enough thermal power to remain competitive with chemical engine Isp anymore. Chemical engines would be able to outlast any nuclear thermal engine in operational lifetime, and if you're going to Mars you can do it with big payloads using chemical anyway, so why even bother with nuclear thermal?

>OneWeb founder Greg Wyler opens up after the company filed for Chapter 11 in March. "I still think OneWeb had and has tremendous value. But, the large-scale consumer broadband market is dead on arrival for satellite. It is niche at best.”
OneWeb didn't think they could make money from B2C, lol.

>>11673454
Yes muh magic fusion tech will solve everything forever in just 20 years

>>11673490
Ten.

>>11673489
Greg got himself trapped in a labrynthine nightmare of contract and spectrum bullshit before his first satellite even flew
SpaceX had it right, have your tech ready before you start courting customers

>>11673492
Never

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>>11673502
Oof, that's physically painful.

>>11673494
Kuiper is taking a more SpaceX-ish approach and hiring lots of hardware engineers.

>>11673502
oh, no
when and where was this

>>11673502
Russian spaceflight is officially confirmed for finito.

>>11673502
>>11673508
>>11673512
>Roscosmos, I don't feel so good..

>>11673502
I HATE IT.

>>11673454
It doesn't work yet. Something something don't wait for technology to arrive because technology never arrives if everyone waits. I GUARANTEE that that fusion drive will never be built until we already have chemical spacecraft carrying humans routinely to Mars and the Moon. We need to already have a real foothold in space for it to make sense to actually develop these high power high efficiency thrusters. Right now the space transport market is perfectly happy to settle for hydrazine monopropellant and hypergolic bipropellant thrusters in most cases, with a minority of solar electric in there as well (although SpaceX's Starlink satellites will change that trend soon, as they all use solar electric krypton ion thrusters to perform maneuvers). With Moon and Mars bases a reality though, there will be actual urgency and demand for these vastly improved means of scooting around the solar system.

Oh, and on top of not working yet, that thing doesn't qualify as a torch drive. It's way better than electric propulsion, sure, and it would allow for things that chemical propulsion definitely cannot, but don't be so liberal with the definition of torch-drive, please. The nuclear salt water rocket is a torch drive; Orion barely qualifies as a torch drive, and that's running off of actual nuclear weapons; a piddly little pulse fusion engine only capable of pulling a few mm/s^2 acceleration is not a torch drive.

>>11673481
>A station doesn't provide any service, though.
I'm trying to figure out how you even came to that conclusion. Do you think that pressurized living spaces with artificial gravity are just free? What are you even saying.

>But there is a need for the cost of fabricating, launching, and assembling the big ship to result in a lower ticket price than that of a transfer via Starship
I don't know why it's so hard for you to understand that a superior end-user experience lies in a higher price bracket.

>There's no reason sending a Starship to Mars would need to be any more expensive than sending a Starship to LEO
There's plenty of reason why the Earth-Mars round-trip mission profile being SS's most intensive and least frequent would be a cost leader.

>NTR life cycle
I'm aware that NTRs degrade, but the rate seems fast to me. If you can source that I capitulate on that front, but that's hardly the crux of the mission profile as you could replace NTR with any engine with decent enough thrust and ISP to get the job done.

>>11673512
It was the third buran (2.01) that was in construction when the Union collapsed, the picture was taken in the early 2000s when it was being taken to be refurbished for airshows and displays and is now at Zhukovsky Airport although some think it is now being scrapped.

>>11673551
Can't believe the Russians fell for the shittle meme

>>11673547
Pressurized living space that sits in orbit for a few months/years before having to kick everyone out because it's going back to Mars again for a while is useless, yes.

>a superior end-user experience
Is not going to come from putting rich people into a bigger ship, it's going to come from rich people buying their own private Starships and turning them into zero G yachts with prostitutes and red velvet and shit. Between the two extremes of 200 person sardine can to Mars and one's own personal space sex fantasy cruise, there exists such things as 12 person upper middle class comfy-cabin living, etc.

>There's plenty of reason why the Earth-Mars round-trip mission profile being SS's most intensive and least frequent would be a cost leader.
Name plenty. The fact is that since Starship is destination-agnostic it can fully pay for itself by going to the Moon or just by launching propellant into orbit before or after going to Mars; there's no reason to say otherwise. Most Starships would be built and scrapped without ever going to Mars, simply because they were built and used between launch windows and reach their end-of-operational-life date, not by being old by by flying often enough. Oh, and I should mention, a flight to Mars may take multiple years round trip, but a flight to the Moon's surface would actually be more expensive, because every Starship requires two rounds of refueling to go to the Moon's surface and back due to their being no atmosphere there to slow down with.

> you could replace NTR with any engine with decent enough thrust and ISP to get the job done
Yes, like Raptor, at which point you're just making a bigger, more expensive to operate Starship.

>>11673570
They couldn't believe that NASA was dumb enough to think that the shuttle was a good idea, so they figured that it was really intended as a military vehicle that would steal satellites and drop bombs on Moscow.

>>11673570
Why's that? Pretty much everyone did. Although, to be fair, they were certain that the US did not build Shuttle to save money, they were convinced that it was for some secret capability it must have had, because it was plainly obvious that Shuttle could not in any universe be a cheaper option than an expendable vehicle.

>>11673570
They didn't want it. It was all about keeping parody for potential military applications and once they learned the American shuttle could be launched from Vandenberg and deploy stuff over the Union in a single orbit they had to respond.

>>11673584
>keeping parody
parity

>>11673580
>the shuttle was so insane the propaganda poster didn't even bother with a witty line and just said "NO" in Russian

>>11673598
i-i knew that...

>>11673574
>no one will ever want to stay in one place for less than 2 years
That's a ridiculous opinion.

>private Starship ownership
Extremely niche. Some people would rather ride a sardine can because they own it than be first class passengers, but they're much less common than... first class passengers. And a zero G environment is by definition less desirable than one capable of artificial gravity.

>Name plenty [of reasons that SS Earth-Mars loop will be more expensive than its other routes]
-It's the most maintenance heavy route, with the longest time spent simply floating amongst the solar wind and cosmic rays. It's also the hardest on the heatshield.
-Doing something only once in your lifetime is not a way to optimize your cost for doing that thing specifically. It's completely the opposite. This is anti-specialization for the task.
-A Mars journey will take a completely different loadout from any other regular route, and thus the vehicle will be practically refitted completely before or after this mission.

>you're just making a bigger, more expensive to operate Starship.
I see you declined the whole "source" part. Anyway, yes, it is bigger and more expensive - it also has a bigger and more expensive task.

>>11672933
based stargate poster

>>11673502
F

>>11673580
It's kinda amazing that the Shuttle was THAT bad.

>>11673582
>Although, to be fair, they were certain that the US did not build Shuttle to save money
IIRC ultimately that is true. It was made (or continued being made) to preserve NASA's infrastructure at all costs.

Why not just give muh jerbs solids faggots something actually productive to do like refresh the ballistic missile arsenal and fuck them right off from anything space program related.

>>11673649
Arms reduction treaties, basically.

>>11673149
Boeing are going to delay as long as possible to compensate losing out on the lander contract expect delays to 2023 as they re-structure to compete with Elon and Bezos, calling it now.

>>11673649
Mainly because, as discussed last thread, ICBMs have a service life measured in years and there's no need to constantly replenish them.

>>11673654
>Boeing
>re-structure
>to compete with Elon
That's far too intelligent. You're thinking with the wrong part of your brain to emulate Boing.

>>11673658
This. They'll probably try to stop Starlink, or pay a senator to make a new law against reusable rockets (or "safety" and "environmental" concerns).

>>11673654
they need to compete with airbus first

>>11673660
There's pretty much fuck all they can do about starlink, it's already got all the approval they need.

>>11672933
There will be more spacefrogs this year.

>Next to their factory, Blue Origin has also constructed a massive building, more than 200 feet high, for the purpose of testing and cleaning the first stage of New Glenn in between flights.
A glorified carwash... bravo turtle man.

>>11673668
Did you make your own motor for that? Or did you buy a premade one?

>>11673668
I like the Starship shaped fins.

>>11673668
Good luck Pepe Gagarin!

>>11673672
I bought E-16 0s

The best decision I ever made was immediately taking the canards off of Starship after one test flight. The instability was making it practically do loops with such a large motor behind it.

>https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/05/heo-tdrs-replacement-improved-artemis-testing/

>>11673672
>>11673681
Since we're on the topic of model rockets, how much does it cost to get a starter model rocket kit? Also anything you guys recommend?

>>11673580
No, Russia, we don't launch from Kansas.

>>11673691
This site might have what you're looking for https://estesrockets.com/home-with-estes-beginners/ Anything that's class H or lower should be good for starters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_rocket_motor_classification There are also organizations that help organize amateur rocketeers http://www.tripoli.org/

>>11673699
That's closer to Montana which iirc the Russians were very concerned about launches from.

>>11673622
>one capable of artificial gravity
Enjoy maneuvering your 300 meter wide rotating spacecraft

>-It's the most maintenance heavy route, with the longest time spent simply floating amongst the solar wind and cosmic rays. It's also the hardest on the heatshield.
And that makes it expensive because . . . ?
>-Doing something only once in your lifetime is not a way to optimize your cost for doing that thing specifically.
Minimizing the cost of a flight to Mars by making each spacecraft to perform the trip also perform several hundred other, short-duration missions to spread out the cost of initial fabrication is the ONLY thing to minmax for. It doesn't matter if the mission isn't perfectly optimized for performance if the vehicle has already paid for itself a dozen times over.
>A Mars journey will take a completely different loadout from any other regular route, and thus the vehicle will be practically refitted completely
Totally false. It would be more expensive to have multiple kinds of manned Starship flying around than to just have one common life support system. At most, going to Mars will require a bigger set of tanks for consumables.

>it also has a bigger and more expensive task.
Which is a useless one that no one will ever bother financing.

>>11673703
>Russians were very concerned about launches from Montana

>>11673691
I get most of my shit from Apogee Components. The cost is going to be, at the very least, ~$20 for a starter rocket which probably comes with one engine, +$20 for a cheap, unreliable launch controller. If you can recover the rocket that will only save you a fraction of the cost each time because shipping fees on black powder motors are ridiculous. It's an expensive hobby.

>>11673670
Christ, modern Elon would at most erect a tent, but for something like cleaning off a stage I bet he'd rather just do it outside using mexicans in manlifts with pressure washers.

>>11673719
ICBMs.

>>11673699
>>11673703
It's flat out inaccurate as hell, so it's hard to pinpoint where exactly that launch is coming from but I'd say that's closer to Colorado than Montana, it's too central to be Montana, no part of Montana is THAT far away from the coast. You can see it's a fair bit to the northwest of Texas, but not so far that it's close to the border with Canada

>>11673699
>>11673719
It seems to signify that they knew about Launch Complex 6 which was officially declared when enterprise was assembled on it in October the year the poster was produced.

>>11672924
i dunno whats more cringe, low IQ anti space right wingers (im right wing and want to colonize this bitch) or left wingers who want space resources diverted so the brownies can get help for eternity

>>11673722
>shipping fees on black powder motors are ridiculous
I know this pain from ammo shipments.
t. /k/

>>11673732
Both. Both are subhuman.

>>11673742
>not sure how this is supposed to help us poor people here on earth
"it wasn't you freeloading cunt" is the answer here

>>11673665
>>11673654
>>11673149

Are you kidding? They need to compete with themselves pre-McDonnel Douglas merger, before they can compete with Airbus, and then be able to compete against SpaceX. Their fuckup has fallen so far from the tree, their entire company needs a complete overhaul out to the next 20 years for them to regain their glory.

Right now, they're the personification of a fat sack of shit that hoards all the food, is practically useless, and creates more problems than solutions.

>>11673713
>Enjoy maneuvering your 300 meter wide rotating spacecraft
What a complete non-issue. For one, 300 meters is an exaggeration even if you want Earth gravity - the only reason it would be that big is if you simply want that much more room, in which case good for you, you must be doing very well. Contra-rotation trivializes this, but even if you have one single ring it practically doesn't matter because the ship does significant maneuvers extremely infrequently.

>bro listen, going to Mars is cheaper than going to the moon because you make the money back by going to the moon
It's so tiring.

>Which is a useless one that no one will ever bother financing.
People pay out the ass to make much shorter journeys palatable. A 3-6 month trip in zero G is the most harrowing experience many of the passengers will have ever had. They will pay an absolute fortune to make it better. Your argument makes absolutely no sense and you have no grasp of what a human is, you fucking retard. I'm done with you.

>>11673149
>A Starship prototype or even an actual commercial model might actually make it over the Kármán line before SLS at this rate
What an absolute clown world...

>>11673799
And to think back in 2014 the Falcon Heavy didn't even exist yet and SLS was basically where it is today.

>>11673806
>"Let's be very honest again," Bolden said in a 2014 interview. "We don't have a commercially available heavy lift vehicle. Falcon 9 Heavy may someday come about. It's on the drawing board right now. SLS is real. You've seen it down at Michoud. We're building the core stage. We have all the engines done, ready to be put on the test stand at Stennis... I don't see any hardware for a Falcon 9 Heavy, except that he's going to take three Falcon 9s and put them together and that becomes the Heavy. It's not that easy in rocketry."
>SLS is real
>I don't see any hardware for a Falcon 9
>It's not that easy in rocketry

>>11673502
Sir, this is a blue board and no gore threads are allowed.

>>11673722
>>11673701
Thanks guys

Have this cool Faith of the Heart
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkocmiQbM4k

>>11673811
SEVEN YEARS of no meaningful progress because they couldn't make a HYDROLOX CORE STAGE. What a disaster.

>>11673812
>Why didn't they let me fly anon? Wasn't I good enough?

>>11673719
Hannah Montana was a huge hit in Russia and they were concerned the launch noise could interfere with the recording of new episodes.

>>11673823
Reminder that some people actually were actually duped into believing that reviving mothballed components of the most expensive ride to orbit in history would result in a quick and easy heavy lift vehicle. Wew.

>>11673812
You can't stop me. NO-ONE CAN.

>>11673823
I'm reminded of a story about a Soviet airplane factory during World War 2. The factory manager was pocketing the money and resources given by the government instead of making much needed fighter planes as was demanded. The party sent two officials to investigate why the factory was producing less than was expected, they found out about the corrupt manager, swiftly dragged him out behind the factory, shot him, and promoted the most skilled worker in the factory to manager. For the rest of the war that factory was the most diligent factory of the entire union.

I'm not saying this is applicable to SLS, but there's a usable idea in there somewhere.

>>11673826
>>11673835

>>11673826
>>11673835

>>11673826
>>11673835
GOD
D A M M I T

and you could have it all... my empire of dirt...

I will let you down.. I will make you hurt...

>>11673865
>>11673872
S T O P

>>11673502
Source on t actually being scrapped?
I hold out hope they are finally gong to preserve it instead of waiting for the building it was in to collapse.

>>11673300
my dream in life is to play basketball on the moon on regulation 10ft goals

>>11673940
imagine dunking your own nuts

>>11673921
see >>11673551

>>11673826
F

China is bad at drawing penises

>>11673065
well shit, they been doing it their entire life. The fact that they cant do practical engineering really highlights the major problems with NASA

>>11673198
hold on
starship may preform a decent altitude test this year
But remember Super Heavy is what ties this whole thing together and i think where still 2 years away from a working version of that system

>>11674062
we're five months away, at most, from a working Super Heavy
just watch

>>11673300
no
it was pure happiness

some assholes made a JWST model out of tin foil and toothpicks
no, wait, this is the real thing
my bad

>>11674077
>JWST
>Existing
Nice CGI, NASA would never let JWST get that far

>>11674100
anon, JWST has existed as a physical object for years now

>>11674102
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuKcG8POreo

>>11674035
What's that, a full 30 yards without driving into a crater and exploding? A new record!

>>11674062
Super Heavy is literally just Starship but longer, simpler, and with more engines. It's not going to take 2 years.

>>11674102
So what are they waiting for, an engraved invitation? That looks like a Falcon Heavy could lift it.

>>11674114
What if you did three stages by stacking two SuperHeavys and a Starship? Could that go TLI without refueling?

>>11672979
Hydrolox would be good to use on the moon since you can create new fuel for it easily using lunar ice and concerns about rocket weight are meaningless since the gravity is so weak.

>>11674115
they already have a launch contract lined up with Arianespace

>>11673732
is the right wing anti space?

>>11674134
Only the mouth breathing "space isn't real" types.

>>11673319
hahahahahaha that makes hydrazine sound like cake frosting

>>11674117
It wouldn't lift off, for one thing. For another, if you did put a big enough stage underneath the Starship Superheavy stack, the middle stage (aka the Booster we know) wouldn't be able to return from orbit unless you gave it an extensive redesign to add aero surfaces and heat shielding. Finally, all this would do would be to let you place a Starship into LEO fully fueled; you'd still need a second launch in order to send up a full Tanker, and allow for the high-elliptical-orbit refueling maneuver that lets Starship land on the Moon and return.

Just stick to regular Starship Super Heavy and do multiple fully reusable flights to refuel in orbit, it's a much better option.

>>11673454
Eh, i'm hopeful but that shit is hard to build. Some cool stuff going on with Z-Pinch drives.

>>11674153
got it, i always thought the right fetishized American space accomplishments. I'm mean im right, and i do all the time

>>11674120
For both methane and oxygen the fuel part of the propellant mixture weighs so little for the corresponding amount of oxygen that you'd probably be better off just sending your return fuel to the Moon with you and relying on metal refining from Lunar rocks to supply your return oxygen propellant load.

>>11674134
I mean, you can't really pigeon-hole either side of the spectrum as anti-space or even pro-space. You get lots of liberals who literally see no point in ever exploring space, and others who think that space exploration is just a waste of money that could otherwise be diverted into gibs. But the left also has plenty of "I fucking LOVE science!" types who cheer on spaceflight.
The right has weirdos who think spaceflight is dumb for a lot of weird reasons. I commonly recurring one I see is the "space doesn't real" crowd of people, who range from flat-Earthers to people who don't think rockets can work in a vacuum or the people that think the Van Allen Radiation Belts prevent people from ever being able to go into space... because radiation. A fellow I know of this persuasion uses the term "Stupid Science Bitch" unironically. These ideas aren't exclusive to right-wing beliefs, but the majority of people that I have interacted with who hold these beliefs are also right-wing. I think it has to do with the fact that most people who get balls-deep on conspiracy theories tend to lean pretty hard right because of the who ZOG/NWO side of things. On the same token, there are plenty of right-wing folks who love spaceflight, and want to see colonization start in their lifetimes.

>>11674158
Don't bet on torch drives ever becoming a reality, we'd need some kind of magic materials or physics in order to reflect/block nuclear fusion gamma rays in order to prevent the heat they'd deposit in the ship's structure from vaporizing it instantly, at the fuel burn rates required to break into the torch-drive region of propulsion performance. The only two exceptions to this are the Orion drive, in which the nukes are going off at a distance enough to keep gamma and neutron absorption to a minimum, and the nuclear salt water rocket, in which several tons of water are forced through all the structural bits of the engine per second in order to keep their temperatures quenched enough to keep them solid.

so when the fuck is blue origin going to launch something into orbit?

>>11673865
sucks ritbros, hope u can get rockets again someday

>>11674193
never, its a CIA PENTAGON laundering project

>>11674173
Also Z-pinch with sheared flow. The coolant gets dumped out the back as extra thrust.

>>11674077
i have a deep seated belief that this thing will blow up on the pad. I don't know why. part of me is horrified,but I also know if it did happen i would howl with laughter.

>>11674204
Z-pinch lacks a significant amount of thrust compared to a true torch-drive. It's more of a quasi-torch-drive, it offers decently high delta V with tolerable burn times, but it's no brachistochrone enabler.

>>11674210
because we know it would make for such a great story. You can't even imagine writing something like that

what's your favorite heavenly body in our solar system? for me, it's gotta be the moon.

>>11674237
titan

>>11674237
titan as well

>>11674237
wow the moon sure takes a beating for us, she really cares and wants to protect us

>>11674214
It's unfortunate the Freeland's concept is so extreme,it's optimized for efficiency to a degree that is very over the top for interstellar transport reasons given its tiny acceleration, you could modify it to improve its thrust at the cost of making it overall less efficient without too much difficulty, especially since the goal for the solar system is to get around 1% of c rather than the insane 10% this thing is made to pull off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25jRvzTPL4A

REALLY hard shit and it may never happen, but I think it's worth exploring for sure.

^^This thing is getting attention because the research it's based off of has born fruit-Shumlak and co just got a million from ARPA-E on top of like 8 million over the last few years after nailing every milestone handily in their experiments. The asshurt from tokamakers if the venerable Z-pinch gets to a Q over one first will be legendary. Imagine seeing ITER getting carved up into scrap....

>>11674237
Neptune. Of the ones we can land on, probably Enceladus.

any good youtubers who will give consistent news updates, but not cringy as fuck

>>11674237
Do you think the moon is masculine or feminine?

>>11674237
Now, what's your favorite spot on the moon? For me, it's Taurus-Littrow.

>>11674286
NASASpaceflight my man, they have daily uploads of progress in Boca Chica but they're spergs so there's no annotation and it's pure footage uploads

Rate your top ten.

>>11674239
>>11674255
you guys only like it because of the name
i was imagining when we get more advanced we'd have ships classifications named after plantery bodies

titan class
mercrury class
Neptune class

of course we'd need adversaries

which is sorta interesting, giving how much money rockets tech costs and how much money war makes people, why arent we trying to setup a martian colony to eventually become an adversary.

>>11674299
has there been a desired moon colony spot thats been determined, a place to build a base?

>>11674345
Aitken Basin as far as I know

I believe the game Moonbased Alpha is also loosely based on Aitken...johnmadden

>>11674299
call me old fashioned, but i'm a Copernicus crater kinda guy. big fan of that ray system

>>11674333
>you guys only like it because of the name
Nah, I like it because it is pretty much a desert planet in the outer solar system with it's own seas, mountain ranges, dune fields, and an actual atmosphere. On Titan, you won't need pressure suits, only protection from the cold and oxygen masks.

>>11674333
I would name ships after whiskey brands. Imagine piloting the SXS Wild Turkey

>>11674352
>imagine not being a Tychofag

>>11674361
101 or 80

>>11674239
>>11674255
Based and Titanpilled. I can't wait for the first starship expedition to Titan to launch from Mars. We can go at max speed and aerobrake in the thick atmosphere, gliding down in the low gravity. Then, refill from the methane lakes, fly around with strapped on wings for keks, and use it as a base to explore the rest of the Saturnian system. Fuck Jupiter.

>>11674286
I would say Marcus House is the most entry level for adults. He stays serious and doesn’t pander to kids but he only posts once a week.

What about it?! is the best right now in my opinion due to his team of graphics artists but has a lot of Thankyou thankyou thankyou to skip.

>>11674398
Starships going to titan are a really long way off. Realistically, you'd have to have a base on callisto or ganymede before even thinking about the saturnian system. Speaking of post-mars colonization, I wonder when the Ceres colony will be started.

>>11674386
I've only had 101, feel like 40% whiskeys are a bit lacking in flavor usually, though they can still be good for mixing.

https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/

neat

>>11673872
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoVtHLxNVlU

>>11674406
Titan will be immediately after Mars is sufficiently set up as a base/colony/staging ground. Once we have ISRU making all the methane we need, Titan is the best option. None of the radiation of Jovian system, literal lakes of rocket fuel. IIRC, because of aerobraking the delta V is less to get to Titan anyway and the transit time isn't that bad. Take the Titan pill

>>11674423
long journey out, barring much faster rocket system. hopefully it happens.

>>11674406
Ceres should be a neo-viking colony

>>11674423
>The transit time isn't that bad
Ahahahahahahah
Also, I think we should focus on colonizing most of the moons of the solar system, with the obvious exceptions of Io and europa.

>>11674409
yeah
I've got a 1.75 L in the cupboard. I had to put it away because I was drinking it in this time of quarantine.

>>11674433
What's wrong with Europa?

>>11674437
radiation blasted ice hell

>>11674438
Donig anything around Jupiter is tricky because that bitch is s p i c y,but it's possible.

>>11674437
>540 rems per day
Not idea.

>>11674433
Mars dwellers will make the trip so that they can be the first person on Titan before they go back to Earth/ stay on Mars. Eternal glory and a legacy of opening up the outer solar system to colonization and exploration.

>>11673149
>date se
You mean it moved to the right by almost a year. Again.

>>11674451
Doubtful. Ceres will have to be colonized first, and it will probably not be done with starships but with purpose built interplanetary ships. Maybe starships will be carried along as landers and crew habitats.

>>11674423
>the transit time isn't that bad

Lul nigger are you serious.

>>11674459
Starship is a damn fine SSTO for any rocky body further out than Earth. It's a reasonable choice.

>>11674468
Starships will definitely be carried on interplanetary vessels as landers/crew habitats. They are excellent for that. But I just can't see them being used for transport in interplanetary space in the outer solar system.

>>11674464
Didn't Elon say that Starship can get to Mars in 3 months if going as fast as possible? If that's the case, you could get to Titan from Mars in 4 years, assuming no tugs or anything else to make you faster. Its doable.

>>11674445
well when your options are:
>generic lava world with +radiation modifier
>radiation blasted icy rock
at least you might be able to hide underneath the crust, but there's nothing of interest down there
>two fucking rocks
Ganymede has an active magnetic field, which is worth investigating, but it's just a bunch of really big rocks with no atmospheres

>>11674478
Very true. We need something much faster than chemical rockets for that.

>>11674480
Yeah it's "doable", but definitely not idea. Much better to use nuclear powered interplanetary vessels with starships docked to them for travel out there.

>>11674481
Ganymede and callisto are actually both "icy rocks" as well, and also are believed to have subsurface water oceans (like most icy moons). I definitely think they're worth colonizing.

>>11674480
>4 years transit through the harsh radiation of deep space in zero gravity

that's brutal. We need space tugs that can get to 1% of c asap.

>>11673570
It‘s funny because they didn‘t even know why they were building them. They just wanted it because Americans had them.
Russia got memed hard.

>>11672944
bigoof^{bigoof}

>>11673668
Fix your parachute. Frogs deserve more safety than some flat earther.

>>11672944
bigoof^{bigoof}

>>11674492
>>11674504
Not ideal by any stretch, but it took Magellan's voyage 3 years to circumnavigate the globe. Glory seekers could definitely do it. Autistic speedrunners spend more years of their life trying to shed two seconds off of their record on a twenty year old game. 4 years for your name to go down in history for thousands of years.

>>11674504
>>11674482
>>11674480
This is what I'm thinking of. Ignore my horrific drawing skills. The center would contain everything you need for an interplanetary spaceship, fuel. communications, general structural support, power generation, extra storage, rcs, radiators, and obviously the propulsion system, which would be a nuclear powered propulsion system of whatever can be used at the time (be it VASIMR powered by fission reactors or z pinch fusion). The starships are docked to the outside and act as living quarters and extra storage for the voyage, and landers/SSTOs for when you actually get to the body in question. Starships could be tethered to the central craft and rotate as well to provide artificial gravity. I actually might spend a couple hours making a fully fleshed out design for this.

>>11674497
ah wait what
I thought they were more like mercury

>>11673826
You think they could‘ve built one for under 140 million dollars?

>>11674548
No, they look like rocks, but they are actually mostly ice. As a general rule of thumb, like 99% of the shit in the outer solar system is made of frozen volatiles, and most of the large moons in the outer solar system are believed to have subsurface water oceans, not just europa. That's why Io is so unique for the outer solar system, because it is mostly silicates.

What interplanetary industry would we see that could actually make money?

>>11674535
do it. I'm about to hit up Freeland and see if i can pick his brain about a SFS Z-Pinch space tug concept.

>>11674555
>money
who gives a fuck, the real currency of this new age is going to be power
manpower
engineering power
It's a new frontier

Which useless system will be colonized first, Mercury or Neptune? Neptune has useful resources, but is too far to be accessible. Mercury is closer, but is worse than the Moon, far too close to the sun, and down a massive gravity well.

>>11674560
I'll do it tomorrow or over the weekend probably. Too tired right now to make a fully fledged design.

>>11674114
>more engines
>simpler
They already had trouble with their thrust structure once with it only designed for three engines. And they weren‘t even firing and vibrating yet.
We‘ll see how it goes with 32 or whatever they have now.

>>11674561
>who gives a fuck about money
>"hey anon, wanna work at my new Martian mining facility for a few years away from your family?"
>"Sure, how much you gonna pay me?"
This kills the full blown furry gay space communism.

>>11674563
Mercury
literally limitless solar power, limited only by your ability to radiate the waste heat away

>>11674572
actually they were struggling to get it to hold pressure
they haven't had any issues with a Starship that they actually put engines on
>>11674577
you'd bring your family with you, stupid
also you'd probably get payed in company credit or something

>>11674355
How do you protect against -200 degree celsius cold? Wouldn‘t any suit just turn brittle and crumble at that point? How thick would that need to be? What could produce enough heat?

These things that the Navy keeps spotting, whatever they are, show us that there are regimes of aerodynamics and propulsion technology unknown to at least the general public. Whether they're turbo-classified supertech or actual ayylmaos, they make me optimistic for the future of human space exploration.

What's your crackpot theory for how the zippy little silver suitcases work?

>>11674588
>"Hey anon, become an indentured servant to a corporation on a harsh planet with no way out. Don't worry, we'll give you company credits to buy things such as nutrition paste to keep you alive, but only if you work hard enough to get them."

>>11674602
they're balloons and shit that a pilot got confused about
now fuck off

>>11674602
They'll either glowy spaceniggers who can fuck off or their unironically weird weather phenomenon.

>>11674588
>Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
>I owe my soul to the company store

>>11673948
And how much did the Soyuz cost to develop back then... NASa has no issue launching with them...

>>11674610
*they're and they're*. Jesus I'm drunk.

>>11674555
All of them. Once you make going to space cheap, everything just happens just like it does on earth-supply and demand drive economic expansion and you get a boom. Ceres will be the Tulsa of the 2050s.

>>11674603
obviously you'd negotiate for a stake in the company
and bring guns, so you can just shoot your boss if they try to scam you
you know, reasonable precautions

>>11674608
Haha yeah Im pretty sure there was some swamp gas reflections too

>>11674610
If they're spaceniggers, that's fantastic. Even if they're weird weather phenomena, the face-melting speed/accelerations and apparent lack of meaningful interaction with surrounding air suggest a good chunk of fun physics that we're ignorant about.

>>11674619
>establish space 2A
Yeah, cause that’s working flawlessly right now.

>>11673580
>steal satellites
That, that's really the most stupid use case of the shuttle...
What do you do if the Russian sat have any kind of sensor that detects it's not in its orbit, and trigger a small explosive between oxidizer and fuel tanks (or anything really)? Plus they can even realistically deny doing it "Oh man, the sat you were trying to steal exploded? Ohhh really sorry, it wasn't designed to be in a cargo hold, must have overheated, too bad".

>>11674641
yeah, it is
I have a gun, feels good

>>11674654
oh well, I just looked it and it was never a goal of the shuttle, my bad.

>>11674687
>I have a gun
Yeah, not before getting a permit to purchase and conceal carry permit along with the fact you're not allowed to posses actual weapons of war from select fire assault rifles and belt feds to rockets and artillery. Yeah, it's working fine.

>>11674687
And the last time you removed the overbearing government with it? You know, the actual purpose of 2A?

>>11673502
That looks like a mockup/trainer though.

>>11673865
I'll never forgive that bastard Tory for cancelling black arrow

>what we could have been

>>11673683
>bruh

>>11674237
It's gotta be Venus. The fiery hell that might be survivable

>>11673502
do svedanya

>>11674608
Uhhhm, sweetie, how come they were confirmed both by radar and pilot visual contact?

>>11674270
I love this one

>>11674894
Fucking tourists clogging muh orbits

>>11674780
Fortunately we have Dominic Cummings as our de-facto PM who loves big science works
Plus in the briefing last night it looked like funding for infrastructure is still a go. Not too hopeful of the Scottish vertical launch spaceport given corona though sadly

>>11673948
>two, independent crew transportation systems
The real plan of course was if you had two companies, one of them would actually get their system working.

>>11673948
But they kept developing Orion anyway? They didn‘t save anything.

>>11674894
Would space stations ever make sense at the Sun-Earth Lagrange orbits?

>>11674035
The only place where they can drive around without accidentally killing other chinese.

>>11674851
Why is the midship in sections of 4?

>>11674978
Artist envisioned that as modular I think.

>>11674555
>What interplanetary industry would we see that could actually make money?
Telecommunications and data services. I'm surprised someone hasn't already tried to make a buck off of them for the Moon/Mars.

>>11674193

>>11674295
no nads, no box
>there are more than two genders

>>11674641
>Yeah, cause that’s working flawlessly right now.

Yep it is. Death penalty for totalitarian commies when?

>>11674603
That sounds awesome unironically.

>>11674077
it's been fully stowed. It's all together now. The next step is to shake that baby and see if comes out alright
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2020/first-look-nasa-s-james-webb-space-telescope-fully-stowed
I bet they used world's shittiest camera because they don't want the photographer making the actual workers sick.

i am a brainlet can someone explain what the effect is when you try to hold something filled with air underwater and let it go and how can we harness this mysterious power

>>11675234
Thats, uh, buoyancy. The water forces it out of the way because it’s significantly less dense than the water, so it rises.

>>11675242
how much air time you think you can get with this? could you get a liquid thats more dense than water and have the same effect?

keep in mind my brain is very very tiny but i do not smoke the hashish

Can you propel yourself around with farts in zero G.

>>11675279
i think you're onto something

>>11675279
You need to put a lighter in front of your ass when you do it.
Then you become the human starship.

>>11675183
>>11674619
>>Anon I'm sorry but we are terminating your employment contract
>>Reason: improper use of language
>>COMMUNICATIONS LOG: "jeff bezos is a faggot"
>>As per your employment contract and due to insufficient credits in your account your life support is being terminated
>>pod depressurization will occur in 10 seconds
>>Have a nice day!

>>11675312
Based. No commies allowed past the Karman line

>>11675270
>a liquid thats more dense than water
Like, say, mercury?
>>11675279
The hard part is getting the aim right. It's easier if you stick a rubber hose up your butt and then you can aim the hose. Be sure to eat plenty of beans first!

>>11673865
pls no bully

>>11673502
What in the living flying fuck......

>>11673502
https://thealphacentauri.net/sovetskiy-shattl-kotorogo-ne-bylo/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-15/musk-s-spacex-faces-union-opposition-to-california-job-funding

California wants to block spacex funding for training 1000 new employees because of Elon. Time to move to Texas/Florida as headquarter?

some more PR about the Artemis Accords:
https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis-accords/index.html
no specific language or identified partners, but it seems like it's as close as possible to space property laws without actually getting there.
This was interesting:
>Providing emergency assistance to those in need is a cornerstone of any responsible civil space program.
>Therefore, the Artemis Accords reaffirm NASA’s and partner nations’ commitments to the Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space.
>Additionally, under the Accords, NASA and partner nations commit to taking all reasonable steps possible to render assistance to astronauts in distress.

Remember when Brindenstine, who was otherwise pretty great, shit on SpaceX for having the starship presentation and said it's "time to deliver" commercial crew. What was that all about? How does he feel now that Boing has been completely btfo and SpaceX is ready to launch?

>>11675492
Fuck Commiefornia

>>11675492
Sounds like it's all according to keikaku, he asks for reasonable considerations to allow his employees to start working again, commiefornianas shart themselves and start screeching, they try to restrict SpaceX funding in retribution and so he has perfect justification to finally move all of his significant business endeavors to a state which isn't a cancer on the union.

>>11675492
Sounds like the perfect time for a certain old space company to try to shut down a threat to its gibsmedats.

>>11673683
What kind of tiny obsolete waste of money joke attachment is that Spaceship serving there?

>be me colonial marine part of the toughest platoon from Shackleton Academy
>get deployed to an anti-matter production plant on Mercury
>it has completely shut own and cut all communications
>UN High Command suspects rebellion
>hell yeah brother time to kill some rebel scum
>upon leaving our Starship we see no signs of life
>bodies, blood, and weird sticky liquid everywhere, at least the lights are on
>platoon splits into two squads to cover more ground
>lights cut out, pitch black
>other squad radios in for assistance as they’re being slaughtered by some unknown foe
>they're all dead by the time we make it to them
>bodies mutilated horribly, pants missing
>can hear howling through the base
>bunker down in a cafeteria
>hear walking outside
>demand that whoever is out there identify itself, no response
>door swings open with some tall dark figure in the doorway
>OPEN FIRE
>one guy is REEEE-ing
>fire until we can’t anymore
>no sign of the figure
>suddenly a 7-foot-tall neon colored antho wolf walks through the doorway
>it speaks without moving its mouth in an effeminate voice
>”OwO what’s this?”
>our reaction when many more of “them” appear behind it

>>11675513

>>11674314
Gany because it's the most planet-like
Europe because of space fish
Titan obligatory
Enceladus
Triton
Proteus, just a cube hanging out on space
Callisto. Underrated. Maybe terraformable.

>>11675623
You have all these resources and techs and you waste it on fucking anthro wolves? Catgirls were so near. Or maybe they are already commonplace? Tell me that's the case and I wont gun you down with the rest of the rebels.

>>11675645
It's from the previous thread, in a ANCAP colonized solar system you would see some weird shit.
Men will go to he edge of the solar system, stare in to the darkness, and jerk off.

>>11674593
Use kevlar and insulation. Kevlar doesn't become brittle, no matter the temperature. That's what they made Huygens' parachutes out of. With a layer of good insulation an inch or two thick, a person's metabolism alone would keep them warm.

>>11674610
Twinkle twinkle little star

>>11675652
I am believer of luxury space communism, but I do hope we get a couple ancap planets/moons in the future precisely because unethical weird shit spices things up.

>>11675645
I think it's implied there was no rebellion, and the space wolves killed everyone in the base. It's like Aliens, but with furries.

>>11673683
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8mVrJAlJwE

Skip to ~40 mins for HLS

>>11675507
He said in a more recent interview that he has full confidence in SpaceX's ability to pull off Starship. It seems he and Elon must have had a few talks, Elon showed him around the place, and he's changed his mind.

>>11675640
>Callisto. Underrated.
Yes.
>Maybe terraformable.
No. It's a big ice ball with the same gravity as the Moon.

>be POL-9000 on 16 PSYCHE orbital facility
>see rogue ship
>alert crew
>it somehow shrugs off small drone fire and barely gets damaged by missiles
>docks with us
>connect to their ship
>see the contents of it
>it's a bunch of men in strange, flamboyant wolf costumes
>they start saying "UwU what's this?" to the normal crew
>my mind suddenly gets flooded with SWF files and image files
>they're all about raping various animal characters like that one underaged fox from the sonic franchise
>mfw i drown in digital shit and i deduce the jews made these monsters

>>11675669
>I am believer of luxury space communism
Yes, i also like to starve to death comrade!

>>11675682
Not lasting for 100m years, yes, but it's the closest body outside of the orbit of Mars with a livable surface gravity but outside Jupiter's radiation belt. All you'd need are some orbital mirrors.

>>11675688
It could work if they all become actual robots.

>>11675688
Someone fittingly quoted 16 Psyche above, and this is why space communism wont be starvation tier. Basically unlimited resources plus automation/robots, why still have capitalism?

>>11675652
>Giger stared into the abyss, the abyss stared back, and Giger started stroking his dick through his pants until the abyss got uncomfortable and looked away

>>11672932
>>11672934
For people who hate trans people you sure know a lot about the terminology

>>11675692
yes comrade, sign up at the nearest goverment office for your free transformation to a workerdrone.
Whe needs organs or a dick, when you just can have goverment control chips planted right in to your brain.
No more worries or thoughts, because you physically can't have them anymore.

>>11675707
I unironically believe that even in a post scarcity economy communism would not work.

>>11675709
Kek.

>>11673584
>>11673580
Why was this such a big fear for the Russians? USA already had a ton of ICBMs pointed at them, why was a shuttle orbiting overhead any more of a threat?

>>11675724
If you want to beat the enemy at a personal level you've gotta BEAT the enemy.

>>11675769
*You gotta BE the enemy

>>11675733
They relied on their spy satellites to watch our ICBM launches. The Shuttle was capable of snatching them out of the sky faster than they could build new ones.

>>11675501
It makes perfect sense if you remember until DM-2 we're still technically without a crew launch since 2011. We don't want countries extorting each other for astronaut rescue if a planned return of crew launch RUDs.

>>11674602
>>11674610

my non crayy theory is that they are weather phenomenon, like plasma currents
my super crayy theory is that they are alien or future human(humans from the future) tech BUT the tech relies on manipulating space time and the reason they havent "interacted" with us is because well they are in a different dimension and the nature of their craft causes them to bleed into our dimension think interstellar.


by the way if aliens really wanted to tease us and help us develop and accelerate spaceflight without coming down to earth. They would put a drone ship somewhere off like saturn or jupiter and transmit a frequency so we would have to development tech to check it out.

imagine the funding that would do into having astronauts fly to some beacon off saturns rings.

>>11674851
anon, youll well only get those sized ships once we start manufacturing in space. Luna would become earths ship yard.

>>11675769
Nah, y'all just closeted
>>11675870
>my non crayy theory is that they are weather phenomenon, like plasma currents
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Condign
>my super crayy theory is that they are alien or future human(humans from the future) tech BUT the tech relies on manipulating space time and the reason they havent "interacted" with us is because well they are in a different dimension and the nature of their craft causes them to bleed into our dimension think interstellar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interdimensional_hypothesis

>>11675669
Why do lazy retards deserve the same amount of stuff as someone who isnt a lazy retard?

>>11675914
>Nah, y'all just closeted
t. a man dressed up in women's clothing trying to attract the attention of other men.

>>11675934
t. secretly wants to fuck me
they know your browser history

>>11675947
people should be more upset that the PATRIOT act is still alive

>>11675690
You'd melt the place. It wouldn't even be a smooth process, you'd have a thickening surface ocean as more and more ice melted, and some truly catastrophic events when huge plates of mantle ice broke free and floated up to the top of the water column. It would be impossible to live on Callisto for a huge amount of time because of this process, and once it was over you'd be left with a low gravity water world with all silicate and metal resources locked up 100 km down through both a liquid water layer and a solid dense-ice layer (since under enough pressure water will solidify into a solid resembling ice but denser than water instead of lighter).

You'd be far better off just living o the frozen surface inside habitats that would be comfortable from day one, surrounded by rocky ice full of the resources you'd need to support your industry.

>>11675724
Know thine enemy

>>11675947
>t. secretly wants to fuck me
I don't want to fuck you, I want to stop your faggotry from infesting this place along with your abhorrent worldview. That's such a cliche tranny argument as well, the only people you can get to fuck you are other gay men.

>>11675690
I don't care how good the gravity is, I am not living on a freezing barren rock a billion miles away. at least Mars looks like earth

>>11675960
Why not use the ice moons for farming? Once we colonize the solar system we'll have another population boom, and growing food on the inner planets is going to be a challenge. A warmed up planet(moon but the gallileans are huge) wide ocean would be useful for growing food.

>>11675968
>I want to stop your faggotry from infesting this place
>brings it up in every completely unrelated thread
Okay.

>>11675983
Even The Expanse didn't melt the entire moon for that, they just had aquaponics in domes with mirror reflectors on Ganymede.

>>11675968
This place is already infested with incels and poltards, more diversity wouldn't hurt.

>>11675990
Dilate

>>11675988
Fair enough but they didn't need much food. Imagine a trillion people Earth and a hundred billion Mars, good luck feeding all of them.

>>11675996
either come out the closet or stop shitting up /sfg/ with your weirdly detailed knowledge of transgender terminology

>>11675997
Don't even get me started on Dyson spheres. Anyways, there's a mod for Stellaris in which you grow food in the atmosphere of gas giants. I'm guessing the ice moon farming makes much more sense and is 10 times easier than that.

>>11675997
That's what the O'Neill cylinders are for. Place them at the Earth-Sun L3 and L5 points and modulate the fake day/night/year cycles to match whatever Earth biome you want.

>>11676005
Will there be chicken on Mars? Deal breaker.

Would Starship use the vacuum or sea-level Raptors to take off Mars?

>>11676013
*take off from Mars

>>11675960
I can see your objections, but I think the drawbacks are worth it. People of the future will be hungry for blue open skies and no o'neill cylinder will be able to provide this.
Regarding technicalities, removing the 100km water column (possibly to be exported to the inner system) would be part of the terraforming process. According to newer research, Callisto is differentiated.

>>11676013
Probably the atmosphere raptors since there is an atmosphere.

>>11675990
The incels are at least aware that they're abominations, and the /pol/fags at least want to actually keep their body in one piece.

>>11676020
>benefits

>>11676018
at least one sea level, considering vacuum can't gimball
>>11676021
this is true, but the martian atmostpheric density is far closer to a vaccuum than 1 bar, a vacuum raptor would probably be more efficient

>>11676013
Vacuum I assume

>>11676011
It can't be easier to build them than orbital mirrors to melt the G.moons
>>11676012
As long as the monstergirlfags aren't the ones making 'em

>>11676033
>It can't be easier to build them than orbital mirrors to melt the G.moons
All your industry is on Earth to start with so yeah it can. Build them in Earth orbit and ship them out when they're done. That's way faster than pushing shit out to Ganymede a piece at a time, especially without torch ships.

>>11675987
That wasn't me. You got defensive about a joke someone made and used it as an excuse to spew your tranny bullshit here despite the fact that it is off topic trash. You feel you have to keep doing this because you don't just want to accept that most people here will never agree with what you've done to yourself and they think that you're a retarded mentally ill faggot.

>>11676040
>most people here will never agree with what you've done to yourself and they think that you're a retarded mentally ill faggot.
I don't care dude, I'm not internet police, you are derailing the thread by sperging about trans people for no reason. I just want to talk about rockets. If you can't stop thinking about trans people on even a Chinese rocket forum you're clearly a closet case. Close the shemale tab, turn off your screen. Walk away.

>>11676020
VR, imagine the internet will be vastly more immersive than it is now.

>>11676065
>internet in space

>>11674237

Mine's Ceres. Spent a 1,000 years hollowing out the body and turn it into one massive ark ship. A micro dyson shell equivalent. The outer surface would be 100km thick, the outer (inner) base layer would be where all the factories would take place. Then the 2nd outer (inner) base layer would be 100km thick of pure fresh water, followed by a third core (inner layer) would be a 600km across hollow sphere with an approximate internal surface area of 4.52 million square kilometers. You'd have 5km across airlocks every 300km.

Take that body, attach anti-matter or fusion engines to one side and you can take it anywhere in the Solar System or within the local group or even galaxy.

>>11676075
theres too scenarios really, we develop a way to digitize the entire brain and allow neurons to be written or unwritten like ssd drives.

and we just transfer consciousness via light speed. so you wanna goto mars?
send a signal with your brain layout to mars and have it download unto your 3d printed body. This is of course hundreds of years into the future.

>>11676013
The risk of using the sea level raptor would be inneficiency, the risk of using vacuum raptor would be flow separation from the bell walls and cathatrophic failure.
They would use vacuum as long as they are 100% sure the pressure is low enough not to cause separation.

>>11676075
It exists now. People are already working on protocols designed to work across serious light-lag links. IPFS is the big open source one.

>>11676020
When you look up you will see the lakes on the other side.

>>11676054
You don't want to talk about rockets, you've started a spat about transgenderism in this thread because someone made a joke you didn't like and now you're trying to pretend that you didn't start the argument in the first place. Your only other contribution in this thread is linking Wikipedia articles so you could say that your posts aren't purely about tranny bullshit.

If you want to a place to talk about rockery without seeing jokes you may find offensive, go to Reddit or any other place on the Internet that accepts your delusions.

I would love to fuck a cute skinny trap.

>>11676093
Can you break it down for a layman? I thought there was no way around light-lag because relativity?

I would love to be fucked by someone who is looking to fuck a cute skinny trap.

>>11676106
That's correct. The point is to accept the lag rather than just throwing timeouts at 30 seconds or whatever and handle things like retries, backoffs, local caching, etc. differently.

>>11676101
come out the closet.

>>11676106
IPFS is like torrent but with a buddy system and content addressement. Buddies save and relay files other buddies want, your buddies can save files and relay them to you if you and the original source don’t have a direct connection.
By being content addressable you don’t ask other peers for the thing at this URL you ask for a certain thing and you don’t need to care where it comes from.
It doesn’t solve the light speed problem but it makes a space network more reliable and usable.

>>11676108
owo what is this

>>11676109
>>11676118
Ah, okay.

>>11676121
UwU

>>11676112
come into the closet
i can make you feel good uwu

getting some real whiplash reading this thread right now