/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11724234

>>11724244

>>11724234
Cool, this should actually mean hop soon. What's the progress on SN5 and SN6? I know SN5 is fully stacked but SN6?

How do rockets work in space?

>>11724248
who knew autism could be so comfy

>>11724263
made a better visibility flag for ksp

>>11724248
>Not tying it down
that thing is going to get blown away

>Starlink public beta to start after the 14th launch
>expected cost of the terminals may be in the thousands
lowered_expectations.mp4

Is there anything more kino than old soviet probes. There's just something slightly rustic about them.

>>11724267
Those tents are so cheap. They are ruined after a week of use.

>>11724255
Don't stir up that schizo. You know he's lurking.

What sort of food would be eaten on transit to Mars?

>>11724299
jello to acclimate the astronauts to their new situation

>>11724263
>>11724265
Based.

>>11724268
Expected, Starlink wasn't going to be cheap on the beginning, anyone thinking otherwise was deluding themselves

>>11724304
>Not using handles of everclear
preposterous

>>11724164
You can't take the full height of the ship as "pressurizable internal space".

Even if we eventually get to the point where we can utilize empty tanks as internal volume (which goes completely against the reusability of the ship), there's still the header tanks up top, the engines with all their plumbing, mounts and motors for the aero surfaces (assuming those aren't also pulled off of a wet workshop ship) plus any wasted space for the bulkheads that used to be the original tanks. It's an absurd amount of volume compared to any current rocket/station, but let's not get too ahead of ourselves.

>>11724268
A few years ago, despite living in a suburb of a major American city Comcast was asking something like $300-500 for installation of gigabit on top of a ~$200 monthly fee, and that's for a customer already connected to Comcast.

For some town out in the boondocks, splitting a couple grand across a half a dozen houses really isn't that much of a cost for an upgrade when your previous options have been shitty old satellite or dial-up. And that cost should only go down as they get into economies of scale.

>>11724299
Assume they might try to do some hydroponics for fresh foods like they've done before on the ISS. Its gets rough eating long life stuff after a while.

BOEING CHADS GET IN HERE

>>11724259
Wonder how this compares to other launches. At least shows there's decent interest.

>>11724259
Itll be even better on a Saturday i think

>>11724397
inb4 it gets scrubbed again and all the normalfags lose interest

>>11724268
there is no possible way they will charge less than $999 for a user terminal, even if it means selling at a loss

We should come up with an experimental setup to induce torpor in mice for long periods of time and see what it takes to bring them out of it harmlessly
Once the data from that is out, we could engineer a torpor pod

One idea could be breathing or injections of hydrogen sulfide to replace oxygen and induce torpor while slowly decreasing temperature to a bit above freezing
We might be able to get the mouse to wake up by slowly letting the H2S flush out and replacing it with oxygen while the mouse is warmed up slowly

The memes coming out of this are great. Also when does starship hop?

>>11724413
*more

>SN4 on the stand with weight simulator, multiple successful static fires and engine mounted
>SN5 fully built with a nosecone set aside with full RCS already installed
>SN6 being stacked, started to get plumbing installed
>SN7 rings starting to be stocked up

How many Starships will they have ready to fly by the time the FAA gets their shit together?

>>11724415
After Crew Dragon launches

when will they start building the super heavy?

>>11724413
For the final version I'm sure itll be way more affordable, but for an initial beta test they can charge whatever they want.

They've already said that the early terminals require a bunch of precision motors but the later models should be entirely passive. That alone probably cuts the price in half.

>>11724457
After they have Starship hopping at 20km. Super heavy is easy once they have Starship figured out since it's basically the same design, it's only difficult in that it requires a shitload of engines which take time to actually build.

>>11724360
>You will never be a SpaceX ninja

Would it be better if nasa builds a space launch facility in Puerto Rico instead of Florida?

>>11724457
Probably once Starship is fairly mature, has good design transfer to the point that a standalone SS is basically also a subscale SH testbed. SH also eats heavily into raptor supply which will probably be the big early constraint

>>11724435
Fucking clouds blue balling me FUCKKK

>>11724472
why? it would be more difficult to get stuff there and it isn't in as close of a political sphere. Also hurricanes apparently turn it into legit third world shit

>>11724465
>basically the same design
Plumbing and thrust structure for 31-37 engines

>>11724472
Probably not, they need to let spacex launch from boca chica

i have a bachelor's in aviation, what do i need to do to get a job at spacex? Could I get a relevant masters?

Tourist fag here. Does the rocket propellant that was loaded and then unloaded in the Falcon 9 today need to be disposed of or can they reuse it?

>>11724497
Both can be reused I think. The RP1 SpaceX uses is just standard RP1 that is subcooled. They just need to pump that back to the tanks, then cool it back down once the next launch attempt rolls around.

The LOX might be harder to reuse as its cryogenic. They'll likely reuse a good chunk of it, but I expect they'd lose a good 10-15% detanking to the tank farm, then retanking to the rocket during the next launch attempt. LOX would have to be topped up.

>>11724497
They just put into refrigerated tanks to store it

>>11724485
I said basically. You have the same tanks in the same configuration (just longer), the same materials, the same diameter, the same engines with the same fuels. It's not going to be trivial to build, but the challenge definitely lies in stockpiling enough engines and not in anything inherent to the design that makes it dramatically more complex than the Starship itself.

>>11724324
>Even if we eventually get to the point where we can utilize empty tanks as internal volume (which goes completely against the reusability of the ship)

SpaceX fully intends to land unmanned Starships and not reuse them on Mars to use as habitats

>>11724324
>You can't take the full height of the ship as "pressurizable internal space".

Sure, but 1000 meters of volume out of 3000 meters sounds fair

>>11724514
I actually bet one of the first starships they send to test out will be a tanker, because they're going to need the tanks anyway for their fuel plant and it's the cheapest thing they could send for the first mission.

>>11724457
How do you know they haven’t already? It’s the same diameter as Starship so any cylinders laying about could be it

>>11724255
the better question is how they work in atmosphere lol

Why does Spacex not simply hyperspace ram the clouds?

>>11724547
because lightning goes zoop

>>11724457
as soon as they build a building tall enough for it
in fact...

>>11724472
If it were a state maybe

>>11724255
https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/newtlaws/Lesson-4/Newton-s-Third-Law

>>11724551
>Saturn V
>”Lel, get on my level, plebs”

>>11724547
Instead of the boring company, maybe elon should invest in the clearsky company. They could seed the sky with drones to break up storms so they can launch any time any day

>>11724629
They're solving it by just building Starship hardy enough to fly in any weather. Thing's already been blasted with lightning to no ill effect, the biggest problem right now seems to be that the strength of the Raptors is shook a methane dump valve loose.

>>11724618
"Ride the lightning!"
-SA-507, November 14, 1969

>>11724646
I was obviously just exaggerating but I would love to know more about Starship’s capabilities. Has Elon talked about launching it in all-weather scenarios. (I know he has an Earth-to-Earth idea to transport people. This would require load and go launching and all-weather launching just to compete with airliners)

>>11724275
venera probes were hardcore

>>11724656
I don't think he's gone in depth about it but I thought that the general idea (something Blue Origin plans to build Glenn and Armstrong for too) is to have the capability to take off and land in most inclement weather. I'd imagine really serious stuff like hurricanes and tornadoes would still be off the table but normal storms would no longer be enough to grind the launch to a halt.

>>11724629
>They could seed the sky with drones to break up storms so they can launch any time any day
this sounds highly impractical with the amount of energy it would take

>>11724539
same way they work in space

>>11724683
Starship seems so far away and so unbelievable, but Musk and his unstoppable ‘tism keeps delivering. And on top of that, NASA has officially given them a contract for Artemis. Can’t wait to see the real thing fly

Anyone else notice the little purple dragon they had in the other seat?

>>11724698
>Seems so far away.
I mean it's literally sitting right out there in Texas, you can drive out there and stare at it. I've never seen a rocket that felt more real honestly. No VAB, no giant closed off warehouse with ITAR restrictions. Fuckers are literally slapping a Saturn sized rocket together for all of creation to gawk at, it's cool. I guess the unreal part is how fucking fast movement on Starship has been, from nothing but an engine to test firings of a vehicle in just a couple years, six prototypes in just the last year alone. I wouldn't be surprised if they break the Karman line before the end of this year in spite of pandemic lockdown delays.

>>11724698
Starlink money is going to make it happen.

>>11724551
Surely if the 100 year old Slav rockets can take lightning strikes during lift off with no fucks given the Tesla one can too

https://youtu.be/IB7-2oHFBnA

>>11724731
the real reason is they dont wanna recover capsules in a storm in the ocean

I think they should name the future moonbase "Armstrong outpost" or "Armstrong station"

>>11724746
We need to name something big after Von Braun

>>11724751
First permanent mars facility.

The spacex ninjas are hot...

>>11724251
Could have sworn they had a nose cone failure

Hop when?

>>11724779
according to elon 3-4 weeks? He didn't say a couple weeks in the interview, rather a 'few'

>>11724751
I agree but i think >>11724760 is more appropriate for Von Braun. Armstrong is perfect for the moon

>>11724751
The "voyager" stations. They can joo it up all they want, but we're calling them Von Braun stations.

Didn't an early iteration of the ITS booster have 60 engines? Or am I mistaken? I can only find sources for the 42 engine version.

>>11724709
I hope texas turns into a space state. Between houston and boca chica, there’s lots of potential for new spaceports

>>11724793
your best bet is to look at the original IAC slides, they're online somewhere

Manned launches from vandenberg when?

>>11724299
Fugu

>>11724795
What with the general exodus of tech firms and just manufacturing and industry of all kinds from Commiefornia to Texas and Arizona coupled with the eventual necessity of multiple long-term pads for Starship launches and landings it will be an inevitability that Texas will supersede Florida as the US's space launch capital. Due to Starship's uniquely large payload capacity (compared to current rockets) and more importantly it's longevity and mass-produced nature the Boca Chica facilities will need to expand greatly to accommodate it. To up tempo you'd want to build multiple pads and fly multiple Starships in volley launches. For say three rockets you'd need six pads and maybe more for spare, three to launch the full stack from with boarding towers, plume deflectors, etc and at least three landing pads as well to allow the boosters to land and then be rapidly moved out of the way so the Starship second stages can follow.

>>11724746
Apollo city as well
Have one of the decent stages as a sealed monument

>>11724810
Auegh.

>>11724795
It's not just that. There's lots of space companies located in Houston because of NASA, plus there's what I like to call "Rocket Row", a string of rocket companies located between Austin and Dallas (same area where Grasshoppers were tested), and there was/is some rocket testing in West Texas. The state used to be home to a USAF space radar too but that's long since been decommissioned.

>>11724793
No never

>>11724818
After spending 6 months in space I for one would wanted to be welcomed with luxuries.

AHHH NOOOO BARON DOUG HARKONNEN NOT MY SPACEX PATCH HEART PLUG
AAAARRGGGGGGGGGGGGG~~~~~

>>11724837
What the fuck is he doing??

>>11724846
pandorum

>>11724846
space madness. poor guy

>>11724837
>Senator Shelby will die before these eyes and he'll know, HE'LL KNOW! It is I, astronaut Douglas Hurley who encompasses his DOOM!
>>11724846
Claiming his sacrifice as punishment for the launch scrub.

>>11724846
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWq15lDh8yM

>>11724299
Pussy.

Poor #12, being stripped of his bushido honor like that infront of fellow oniwabanshū

>>11724837

>>11724875
The scrub is a cover for the truth, that Falcon 9 has insufficient thrust to haul Doug's enormous mass into orbit.

this purple dinosaur looking thing is the ship mascot perhaps? They never did reveal the name

Trump will be back on Saturday to watch in person.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1265756765389418496

>>11724892
Maybe it’s the dragon?

>>11724897
wtf is “#ThePersistence”

>>11724837
>Hand it over
>that thing
>Your MISSION PATCH

>>11724907
Political stuff. Not space related at all.

>>11724906
looks more Raptor-y

>>11724846
he's going to fucking eat it

>>11724907
proposed Highlander sequel

Seriously though, why did Doug take the patch of one of the techs? He ended up giving it back after the scrub, is this some new tradition where they send patches up to the ISS?

>>11724913
Sadly that shit is space related, because congress determines if NASA has money or not, and if NASA has no money SpaceX has a lot less money because their biggest costumer is NASA and their second biggest costumer is the DoD.

>>11724922
not new exactly

>>11724933
Those are mission patches, what Doug took was just the SpaceX logo. There was a lot of talk going into this about starting new traditions, or it could just be that the tech asked him to take it up and back.
>>11724892
>>11724906
It's a dinosaur, not a dragon. Maybe the toy of someone's kid.

https://www.parenting.com/shop/ty-ty-flippables-tremor-aqua-and-pink-sequin-dinosaur-plush-toy-regular-michaels-p2357ef641f1027b0599f2e591ff641bf.html

>>11724948
Never mind, had to go to R*ddit to figure it out, we need to step up our game. The patch taking was started by shuttle astronauts.

"Astronauts take name tags off their closeout crew's coveralls and fly them; you can see them in photos from orbit."
https://twitter.com/robertpearlman/status/16745096459?s=21

excuse me tovarishi, what is "scrubbing"?

>>11724856
>>11724837
If Doug is the Baron then is Bob Sting?

>>11724979
Florida thunderstorms >>>> Kazakhstani blizzards

>>11724846
he's trading him a patch, he puts it up inside his mask so he can look at it closer. The mandable is in like the center of his vision.

>>11725003
no no, he's ripping out the heart plug. You see, in Florida the pollution is so bad that everyone get them installed; it filters out the toxic air. But Baron Doug felt the need to sacrifice #12 in order to appease the guild navigators

>>11724814
Well elon is more than welcome to move here. Houston has awesome access to space (NASA duh) as well as a fucking HUGE port. He can use the boring company to build a giant tunnel from houston to boca to move the cargo at a reasonable rate, and launch out of boca

>>11725014
then why did the other astronaut take a patch from 6?

>>11725018
oh I didn't notice that one

>>11725017
Doesn't Houston wind up underwater every time it rains? I don't think more underground tunnels are what you guys need.

>>11725017
Wait I take that back, boca is far away. You could just ship stuff there directly. The drive from houston to boca chica is a longer drive than me just going to LSU

>>11725017
>underground tunnels
>in Houston or Boca
"no"

>>11725023
Housten needs a seawall

>>11724299
Not other astronauts. Hopefully.

>>11724793
Nope, it's always been 42 engines. They were more powerful in that design too, by the way. Actual Raptor has lower thrust.

>>11725029
Build a giant geodesic dome on top of Houston
Make it a prototype Martian city

>>11724367
https://www.thelayoff.com/boeing

>>11725044
Mandela Effect strikes again.

Semi related question, is there an upper limit to the number of engines a stage of a rocket can have? A point where adding even just one more engine introduces significant technical challenges or diminishing returns?

>>11725058
>is there an upper limit to the number of engines a stage of a rocket can have?
your ability to get them started on time and control them

>>11724897
Awesome, makes the launch feel more special. I didnt realize a president hasn't watched a launch since 98. Figured Obama might have watched sts 135

>>11725058
Yes
Eventually the plumbing and wiring gets so complicated and takes up so much room, it’s unfeasible
That’s why Saturn V opted for 5 massive F-1’s

>>11725065
the Saturn I didn't have any problems

>>11724929
Do we have estimates of their revenue sources? Like, if NASA is 10% and the DoD another 5% but they have 85 random customers each worth 1%, that's not so bad.

>>11725071
Pretty sure its because Saturn I was just a bunch of smaller rocket tanks strapped together, and the engines didn't really have to share all that much plumbing as they could just draw from the nearest fuel and oxidizer tank.

>>11725058
There might not be a rigidly calculated number, but at some point the engineering of hooking up dozens and dozens of rockets will get so complicated that it becomes inevitable your rocket would suffer multiple engine failures even operating at peak performance. As is true with all machines, a newly minted rocket engine will have two periods of extreme danger in it's operational life, the first firing of it's life cycle and then the very end of it's life cycle. If you have an engine which is 99% reliable but your rocket needs 100 first stage engines, it's a guarantee that at least one of them will fail out. It might be a relatively gentile failure, or it might be one where your propellant eats through the chamber wall and the engine explodes, or it might be one where the turbomachinery cracks and one of the pump blades effectively detonates, hurling chunks of blade into surrounding engines and the thrust plate of the rocket.

Honestly I'd say Superheavy will probably be pushing that limit already with nearly three dozen engines in operation simultaneously.

>>11725080
I do wonder though what Superheavy's engine-out capability is that allows for:
Booster Recovery and Starship Orbit Insertion
and
Booster loss but Starship Orbit Insertion

What's the weather like for Saturday?

>>11725098
Only Allah knows, anon.

>>11725100
inshallah

>>11725064
Obama hates space and wanted to shut NASA down

>>11725095
probably depends on how much payload the Starship has

>>11725104
Obama hated the Constellation pork swamp and wanted to shut it down

>>11725080
Gee, if only there were a way to test engines before launching the rocket for the first time.
>It might be a relatively gentile failure
>gentile
kek

You are on a spacewalk with Bob and Doug working on the ISS. Suddenly an explosion sends them flying off into the void. You have save only one of them. Who do you save and why?

For me, it's Doug. He seems to be the nicer of the two and Bob is always prodding him along like a senile grandpa.

https://www.sciencechannel.com/tv-shows/nasa-spacex-journey-to-the-future/full-episodes/nasa-spacex-journey-to-the-future

Full video from 1 hour 35 min long.

>>11725110
he failed
SLS is still here and still sucking tax dollars

>>11725114

>>11725118
SLS was designed to make it impossible to kill.

>>11725113
I’m not sure. Both have a wife and one kid.

>>11725113
I'd save the happy looking old dude. I can't remember their names.
>>11725123
Yes. Congress succeeded.

>>11725111
Woops, sloppy typing. True, I think the point still stands though, there is no 100% reliable engine of any type, the more engines you pile on the higher your chances of multiple failures are. Obviously there are also engineering challenges for going in the opposite direction design wise too, such as bigger engines starting to get serious combustion instability problems requiring baffle plates just to fire reliably without exploding, or turbomachinery eventually ballooning to such a size that the engine would no longer have a practical TWR.

>>11725047
I wonder if our resident Boeing shill got laid off.

>>11725128
At some point it starts making sense to go Nuclear Lightbulb rather than chemical.

>>11725135
at some point it starts making sense to just cut your payload into pieces

>>11725137
BOEING'S LAST RESORT

>>11725145
HYDROGEN LEAKS
TANKS BLEEDING

>>11725147
CAN'T GET MY CAPSULE TO STOP ITSELF SPINNING!

>>11725098
It's not looking too good.

>>11725137
>>11725145
>>11725147
>>11725155
DO YOU EVEN CARE IF MY PORK'S NOT FEEDING?!

>>11725118
Jim should have fucking axed SLS, kicked boeing in the nuts, and reverted back to Ares V. It’s basically the same concept, uses the same shuttle parts, and the work already done on SLS could have mostly been transferred over. ULA could have been given the go to build Ares V but at the same time I have no idea how this stuff works and i’m sure the politics are more complicated. Am I retarded?

>>11725163
yes

>>11725165
I still stand by my statement

>>11725159
[Sitar Riff]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5KV0axPgog

>>11725163
Yes but I also wish Bridenstine and NASA had the capability to unilaterally shit allover Boing! Unfortunately they're a mega sized contractor for multiple fields and no government organization will ever simply dump them on the curb.
We already know they can commit what is essentially negligent manslaughter on a massive scale by knowingly flying planes with incorrectly programmed avionics packs without informing pilots and the worst thing the government will do is forbid them from flying the planes. In a non-nepotistic world they would have been thrown aside like trash or given an absolute ultimatum that they either reform or stop doing business in the US.

>>11724255
They don’t, most of these “rockets” are just filmed at some Hollywood studio and special effects are added in real time

>>11724259
inb4 it blows up on Saturday and that graph would REALLY go up

>>11724255
Very carefully.

>>11725181
Hating boeing has turned into a meme. Especially on twitter. Elon fags consoom anything tesla or spacex-related and shit talk boeing like it’s some sort of Heeb company shilling for money that doesn’t have almost a century of space exploration under their belt.

>>11725204
>>11725133
Lmao, guess you didn't get laid off after all.

>>11725204
>and shit talk boeing like it’s some sort of Heeb company shilling for money that doesn’t have almost a century of space exploration under their belt
You're right, I should correct that. Boeing is the Jewish Aerospace Wendigo that murders other companies, including the competent parts of Boeing, and wanders around wearing their skins, while emitting a horrific curry stench.

>>11725204
I don't hate Boing! for the meme value though, I legitimately think their company has fallen into severe disrepair due to unacceptably bad management by non-engineer fucking normie suits who only think about sucking off their investors. It's great for short term gains that you can take with you when you collapse the company and leave with your golden parachute, but it isn't a viable long term business strategy and never has been. I don't give a fuck about Boing's pedigree if all they do right now in the moment is fuck up left and right.
Can't get their capsule that costs more than some space programs to fucking work right because it's coded like shit just like their plane that auto-crashes itself, can't put together a viable lander to submit, rocket program keeps getting delayed and overfunded in a way that sure does look like a heeb company shilling for pork money.
SpaceX by comparison looks pretty fucking good right now, fast and aggressive strategy which at least makes use of failures instead of using failures to justify more pork and slower schedules, fast design iteration, if the weather holds out they'll be sending humans to space more than a year before Boing! even scrapes it's capsule back onto the launch pad for yet another unmanned test. They're slapping together a novel heavy launch vehicle prototype that may outmode their own current rockets simultaneously, successfully submitted a version of it as a moon lander, and are regularly launching a shitload of commercial satellites.

>>11725156
Jesus fucking christ

>>11725212
You're describing McDonell Douglas.

>>11725238
Which is now Boeing.

>>11725204
>Hating boeing has turned into a meme.
They would hire an electrical engineer over a better qualified aerospace engineer for a CFD job because the electrical engineer had a higher GPA and asked for less salary.

t. Has a friend who works at Boeing

>>11725230
>rocket program keeps getting delayed and overfunded in a way that sure does look like a heeb company shilling for pork money.
To be fair, that's the fault of NASA management paying Boeing for being late. Sure they're a shit company for doing it, but NASA straight up encourages them. The rest of the points are fair though. Fuck Boeing.

>>11725118
aesthetic

>>11724414
Would stasis like this even be viable or practical?

>>11725287
probably not

I asked this in the last thread, but does anyone have the webm of that Russian cosmonaut talking about how life on earth is meaningless while he's in a Soyuz returning to Earth?

Kinda glad it didn't launch since I would have been wageslaving, now I can watch it on the weekend

>>11725317
it's gonna get scrubbed then as well

>>11725305
fuck I know what you're talking about. It was a Soyuz launch, before launch. he was talking to another cosmonaut. They were talking about the nihility of flying to space, general Russian glum outlook stuff. also vodka. Where the hell is that clip?

>>11725305
this one? don't feel like compressing it
https://s2.desu-usergeneratedcontent.xyz/wsg/image/1486/50/1486506975253.webm

>>11725326
Come on, man. America needs a win.

>>11725337
Fuck, man, I was not ready for that today.

>>11725287
That wouldn't be enough, the blood needs to be flushed with something (possibly glucose) to prevent it from freezing and causing massive cell injury, then that process has to be undone before the body returns to normal homeostasis because a huge glucose load like that would fuck up a normal human pancreas. There a probably tens of other major issues with inducing long term hybernation/torpor/stasis in humans who were never evolved to enter such a state safely. Frankly though we've already accomplished lot of things through technology that we were never evolved to do well, so I wouldn't want to say it's an unsolvable problem.

>>11725317
Working is fun dumb ass

>>11725337
>>11725328
ah yeah that one, I misremembered it

>>11725250
All good points. It’s a fucking miracle Jim had the sense to fuck them over for the Artemis lander. Instead he gave it to three companies, two of which I’ve never even heard of before.
The mistakes with their planes and capsules are embarrassing, but the fucking cost and delays of SLS are absolutely unforgivable. It was supposed to be a cheap and quick rocket using shuttle parts. It somehow has turned into a money pit. I hope Jim and the rest of NASA starts putting pressure on them by funding more small companies that show they can get the job done quicker, cheaper, and safer

>>11725359
look up Constellation, it was already a money pit back then and Congress mandated that the same contracts be continued
Congress saw the money pit and started shovelling

post yfw when the launch got scrubbed

>>11725369

>>11725352
Really depends on the work

>>11725367
Yeah i’m familiar. I work at NASA (albeit I work on geology so anything about rockets is just armchair stuff, but i’m still exposed to it on a daily basis). Was Atlas V just as expensive as SLS? How fucking hard is it to convert the shuttle sans the entire orbiter into a god damn rocket

>>11725369

>>11725352
>0.05 shekels have been deposited in your retirement account

>>11725369

>>11725374
Shuttle-C and Direct would also have been money pits, anon.
Atlas V is significantly cheaper than SLS
Even Delta IV is significantly cheaper than SLS, and that was stupid expensive

>>11725058
Simpler is better.

>>11725374
>How fucking hard is it to convert the shuttle sans the entire orbiter into a god damn rocket
Very hard. The entire Shuttle program was made around keeping as many Apollo jobs facilities and infrastructure as possible so NASA wouldn't fade into oblivion when Nixon wanted to scale down the agency. SLS/Ares is just that motif taken to the extreme without the semi noble cause of maintaining NASAs space capabilities.

>>11725369

>>11725389
Yeah, NASA went into hardcore political self-preservation mode when it was clear that Apollo was being shut down, and then never stopped. I don't know if they can stop without a violent disruption.

>>11725369

Do you think Jeff is going to do anything soon or keep biding his time?

>>11725392
Congress controls their purse strings, all they have to do is stop wasting money on it. But it's peanuts compared to what government spends every day, and the constituents are real.

NASA is a jobs program.

>>11725396
Blue Dildo is a failure.

>>11725396
He's probably happy to be a spacefleet-in-being. Amazon only jumps in when it thinks it's worth annexing a line of business.

>>11725396
he's building a factory and a launchpad, which is pretty serious
supposedly it'll be ready late 2021

>>11725337
where can i get that ipad charger he flips that fucker around like its a baton in color guard

>>11725404
woah source? would love to see actual progress

>>11725399
a huge chunk of NASA is a jobs program
there's a small part of NASA that does real work

>>11725396
Slow burn but his company may in 20 years come from behind and build on SpaceXs work by fielding a real fleet.

>>11725409
NSF mostly
the shitposters haven't latched on yet so there's not ten million threads of meaningless bullshit (there's only one, and you can just ignore it)

>>11725410
Yes like everything the government spends money on, there are 10 admin posts for every one person doing actual work. Nice gig if you can get it.

>>11725396
No wonder Elon wants to leave Earth so badly
Bezos and his ilk would turn Earth into Commoragh

>>11724837
Imagine how nervous those guys are... they'll board a SpaceXplode rocket in few days and be dissolved into atoms.

>>11725434
Just for the record, NASA has killed a couple dozen humans in launches. SpaceX has killed zero.

>>11725434
The capsule's probably fireproof and automatically ejects and shit.

R-right?

>>11725439
yeah

>>11725434
No Israeli satellites. So they're fine.

>>11725438
>SpaceX has killed zero
SpaceXplode has also launched ZERO people into space.
So what's your point?
Their rockets might be enough "low" risk for cargo but there's ZERO chance I'd ever want to board them. They're simply not proven for human transport.
SpaceX didn't learn much from NASA when it comes to building reliable propulsion systems.

>>11725448
Shooo ULA shill

>>11725448
nigger

>>11725338
i'm sure they'll get a win going through this >>11725156 weather

>>11725454
Don’t reply to trolls

>>11725337
That's the one, thanks anon. Hits like a truck every fucking time I see it.

>>11725465
a.... ten-ton truck?

>>11725448
>Their rockets might be enough "low" risk for cargo but there's ZERO chance I'd ever want to board them. They're simply not proven for human transport.

Oh wow guys, an anon won't get on a rocket we need to ask for a new one

How many Mecha-Ikas will it take to colonize Mars? 100? 1000?

>>11725504
How can you cram 100 humans in there?

>>11725504
I think Elon said ten million tons of stuff or something

>>11725509
Never been in an orgy?

When is the next Rocket Lab launch? They've got it dressed and ready to punch it right?

>>11725369

>>11725509
easily, you could cram a thousand humans in there airline style

>>11724234
>>>/pol/259062352

>>11725516
>>11725504
What non-essentials should be included on the first Mars lander?

>>11725546
like a hundred tons of MREs and water

>>11725549
“Non-essentials”
“Food and water”
-_-

>>11725546
Tablets for reading and watching movies

>>11725554
yeah, you heard me
just a hundred tons of extra, completely pointless MREs
the crewed ships will bring enough food and water to support the crew for the duration

>>11725529
no thanks

>>11725509
lube

>>11725561
I'm having fun

>>11725516
>~150t payload
66,667 launches just for cargo unless he builds even bigger rockets
Holy fuck. At that point the Sea Dragon Heavy starts looking like a bargain.

>>11725571
>unless he builds even bigger rockets
That's the plan. Also it gets easier with lunar industry.

>>11725571
>66,667 launches just for cargo unless he builds even bigger rockets

Sounds doable let’s go

>>11725560
OK, but then you have to bring along Steve1989 as one of the passengers.

>>11725576
nice

>>11725546
Pogo sticks.
>yeah we could wait for the starship with the rovers
>or we could bounce along like jet propelled kangaroos in 0.3g

>>11725576
Nice, just make sure the capsule doesn't hiss

>>11725573
Ohare has 2300 flights a day. It’s quite doable

>>11725584
>"nice hi-"

>>11725588
His lungs and throat are so tough he'd be able to smoke in Mars atmo.

>>11725529
>>11725561
not telling you to join the conversation, but it's interesting nonetheless

https://www.thelayoff.com/boeing

>>11725509
They are planning 40 personal cabins anon, wouldn't call it crammed.

>>11725396
He’s to busy snorting cocaine.

fucking huge

>>11725509

>>11725504
i wish we would just ban /a/ fags from /sfg/

>>11725782
anime weebsite

>>11725786
>hasn't been an anime website for over a decade
You should grow up or kys weeb

>>11725806
wrong

>>11725821
posting your pedo fantasies doesn't change the fact that 4chan hasn't been an anime website for a long long time.

>>11725828
>pedo fantasies
Not even him, but project harder, faggot.
Don't like anime posting? You came to the wrong place.

>>11725828
>>11725831
i really don't care if you post gay anime pictures but 4chan was literally never an anime website

>>11725833
>literally
Yeah, feel free to find somewhere else to post at any time.

>>11725834
Yeah, feel free to find somewhere else to post at any time.

>>11725831
>Not even him
sure you aren't
>Don't like anime posting? You came to the wrong place.
This has never been an anime website and all these /a/ fags post pedo shit.

>>11725836
You want a fucking cracker for that post, Polly?

>IT'S NOT AN ANIME WEEBSITE

>>11725843
You want a fucking cracker for that post, Polly?

Anime is cringe

>>11725850
YOU'RE CRINGE, BOYO

>>11725389

Protection? No.
Corpulence? Yes.

>>11725844
>>11725854
kys

>>11725389
>>11725392
>>11725399

This is another layer of rationalization from the program and its supporters to justify it, but predicated in cynicism. NASA is there, it is not going away, the program doesn't maintain it, the program occupies what it is doing, which is the program content the constituency of ideological supporters of the program want to continue to be there rather than a program that isn't it.

Even the worldview of opponents to the program is contaminated by the junk put out to defend it.

>>11724303
Why did i laugh at this

>>11725873
Big Jim had some really interesting things to say regarding commercial utilization during the webcast yesterday, looking forwards to see if he can change any hearts and minds at NASA

>>11724785
Are they building another test stand? They aren‘t seriously going to clog up the entire starship pipeline for that long waiting for a hop, right?

Feels like a year of delays so far.

>>11725896
They're focused 100% on DM-2 and they're not going to provide people with a potential explosion until that one's well on the way.

>>11725438
Spacex has blown up rockets
i never have
clearly i have the better space program

>>11725369
I mean, the only thing that surprised me was that they proceeded as far as fueling before scrubbing. Personally I wouldn‘t even have started the streams and suited up the astronauts for a 40% chance of launch.

>>11725924
Crew got to learn what sitting in the capsule feels like during fueling. What noises to expect etc.
Shit like that is important too.

>>11725903
DM2 will be through by saturday or sunday.
Doing nothing at Boca for 3-4 weeks after seems wrong.

>>11725939
>DM2 will be through by saturday or sunday.
Wishful thinking. Right now it's 60% chance of weather violation for both.

>>11725929
They already played them an audio recording of that from the previous test missions.

>>11725771
Well done anon

>>11725941
Which means 84% chance it‘ll be through after Sunday.

>>11725950
Were you around for the shuttle age? KSC should be an acronym for Kennedy Scrub Centre. Manned space flight is not the same as launching satellites.

>>11725945
Audio recording is hardly the same as sitting there, feeling the vibrations and listening to every gurgle.

>>11725958
Anon, they already showed they‘re willing to wait until 15 minutes before launch. No reason to think 60% doesn‘t mean 60%

>>11725950
50%, either it happens or it doesn't.

>>11725979
Weather is unpredictable as fuck, doubly so in Florida.
But you don't get it for manned space flight, especially for the maiden voyage of a new craft. They're not gonna fucking launch that thing unless it's under almost perfect goldilocks conditions.

>>11725941
Ah fuck, I misread. It‘s 60% for a violation. Thought it was 60% to launch.
So a 64% chance to launch overall. But then weather data from now for Sunday is probably garbage anyway.

>>11725991
Weather prediction is "shit I just pulled out of my ass", yes. But it's tropical hurricane season, it's the maiden voyage of a new craft and it's NASA.
She ain't going anywhere in a hurry.
That's why nothing is happening at Boca Chica.

>>11724303
>You become what you eat.
Kino.

Why is there an instantaneous launch window?
You have to do 1 or multiple hohmann transfers anyway, right?
Can't the craft be given some extra time to hang around in a lower orbit for a while if necessary to allow for a non-instant launch window?

>>11726243
it has to catch up with a very fast moving object

>>11726243
Because they're astronauts, not kerbals. They can't just hang around in orbit forever trying to catch up with the ISS.

They didn't launch because space is fake you absolute morons.

>>11726257
not forever, but I was just wondering why there isn't something like a 30-minute buffer to get to the initial orbit, before initiating the transfer at a fixed time to then catch up with the ISS.
>>11726252
yeah, but they are not going from ground straight to the target orbit in one single full power burn

>>11726281
Because a "30 minute buffer" in orbital mechanics is not 30 minutes of catchup. That's days if not weeks of hanging out in a little fart box.

>>11726283
Plus there's also funny things with nodal precession

>>11725504
As many as it takes.

>>11725996
>nothing is happening at Boca Chica
But they sure are staccing a lot of water towers.

>>11724979
and that rocket's cross section is much larger

Remember to not respond to obvious bait

>>11724520
1km3 = 1 000 000 000 m3

>>11725369
spacex absolutely BTFO by the Weather!

>>11726545
no bully , you need to make up!

No real change in today's weather forecast, still a 60% probability of gay bullshit.

https://www.patrick.af.mil/Portals/14/Weather/Falcon%209%20Dragon%20Crew%20Demo-2%20L-2%20Day%20Forecast%20-%2030%20May%20Launch.pdf?ver=2020-05-28-092610-563

>>11726524
not this shitto again
1km3 = (1000m)3 = 1000000000 m3
1k(m3) = 1000(m3) = 1000 m3
(exponent superscripts implied of course)

>>11726576
Shouldn't they just postpone the launch until it's like at most 20%? PR is a big part of this mission and people will probably get annoyed and lose interest if they keep scrubbing just before launch.

>>11726585
they can't can they? I was under the impression these things were scheduled much farther in advance to the point where any sort of weather forecast will be unreliable. takes too long to get approval / clearance

>>11726592
They have several windows planned, if Saturday doesn't work they can try on Sunday and then Wednesday and Thursday. Weather looks like shit on both Saturday and Sunday so maybe they should just skip those and try on Wednesday.

>>11726597
sure, but like you said those are all planned windows. if Friday was suddenly gonna be the day to do it they can't just change the schedule right?

>tons of chinese spaceflight news is dropping
>not a word about it on sfg
the absolute state of this general

>>11726635
Why don't you just fucking post it instead of being a passive aggressive crybaby? Ever thought about doing that?

>>11726635
We don't read bug.

>>11726635
I don't see you posting anything about it,
so either post links or STFU

>>11726635
Most Chinese space news I run into is vague. That uncertain stuff is unacceptable.

>>11726635
Are they still dropping toxic first stages in villages they don't like?

whens the weather update?

>The first module for the Chinese space station will launch next year
>In total 11 launches will be conducted to complete the construction of the space station by around 2023
>China will launch its Tianwen-1 Mars mission in July and Chang’e-5 lunar sample return in the fourth quarter before proceeding to launch the space station core module.
>The three-module, 66-metric-ton space station will host three astronauts for six month rotations
>The outpost will orbit at between 340-450 kilometers for at least 10 years. Orbital inclination will be around 43 degrees to allow crewed launches to the station from Jiuquan in the Gobi Desert.
>The station could potentially be expanded to six modules, using apparent backup modules.
>A co-orbiting two-metre-aperture space telescope will also be launched following completion of the basic station configuration. The ‘Xuntian’ optical module will be able to dock with the space station for maintenance and repairs.
>“Its resolution ratio will be equivalent to the well-known Hubble telescope, but its field angle will be 300 times larger than the Hubble telescope.
https://spacenews.com/china-outlines-intense-space-station-launch-schedule-new-astronaut-selection/

>>11726689
https://www.patrick.af.mil/About-Us/Weather/
See for yourself. Today's forecast is the same as yesterday. 60-60. Blueballing ahoy.

>>11726690
>will
>will
>will
>will
Yawn.

>The two space technology powerhouses are discussing plans to pool resources for collaborative lunar operations, according to an article by RIA Novosti that quoted a source in the Russian space and rocket sector.
>A bilateral group is working on lunar cooperation plans, including drawing up blueprints for a shared base and separate bases, according to RIA.
>If China and Russia team up to launch a lunar mission, they would effectively be throwing down the gauntlet to the U.S., which has been working on its Artemis program to land humans on the moon again by 2024.
>Russia is supporting China's efforts to build an early warning system to detect missile attacks from enemies.
https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Russia-pulls-China-closer-with-ties-in-space-exploration-and-energy

The early warning system is most interesting because some systems double as spacecraft detection systems, pic related.

>>11726690
Good. I can only hope space race 2.0 is on the horizon. I hope all their launches go perfectly and on schedule and it shames the American spaceflight industry into actually trying.

>China's falcon heavy equivalent will have it's first (expendable) flight this year
https://twitter.com/AJ_FI/status/1265975801402572800

>>11726704
>Space war 2.0 is warming up

>>11726690
The co-orbiting space telescope that docks with the station seems like an interesting concept. Although, I'm not sure how useful that would be.

render of the mars mission set to launch in late july

Detail of Long March 9 super heavy lift, still set for 2028+ launch

then there's some shit about new weather satellites and the beidou satnav being completed with a launch in june, blah blah

Does anyone have that Air Force study done earlier this year (or maybe last year) that evaluated USAF launch providers for the future? It was the one that came to the conclusion that the number of launch providers is going to go down and recommends that the Air Force should try to keep three alive in the short term and later only focus on two.

>>11726690
But none of this is "dropping", it was already announced a while ago and discussed here, but since none of it has actually been done, what's left to discuss?

I still don't understand why SpaceX cannot delay the Demo-2 launch for ten minutes and still meet the ISS within almost the same amount of time. Is it because they would no longer be on the same orbital plane as the ISS?

bug vid of some of the news
https://youtu.be/Um5hrBlY-3Y

>>11726761
>3 module launches, 4 crew launches, 4 cargo launches, 2 year timeline
at least they're finally picking up the pace of crewed launches

>>11726752
>ten minutes
Do you know how long it takes for ISS to orbit? 90 minutes. That's 40 degrees of phase, almost 1/8 of the way around.
Realistically they could maybe get away with a few seconds, but that's still a lot of extra burn they have to do to catch up, and NASA doesn't want to even risk that little.
And they can't just wait for the next orbit because precession means that the next time around they won't be on the same orbital plane.

>>11726752
Because the ISS is in a 51.64° orbital inclination for starters. lrn2orbital mechanics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNXPtZDS-cg

I haven't watched this video, but I saw it had a visual representation of the orbital inclination on a globe. So that will probably help people still not understanding why they can't "just delay 10 minutes".
If you don't get it after sitting through that, then pick up a book.

Hold on I’ll make a video explaining it to the plebs

>>11725571
>66,667 launches
If you have 1000 starships that can launch once 3 times per day it's doable

>>11726744
>But none of this is "dropping"
Except their boosters.

>>11726724
Is it reusable? Any rocket that isn’t reusable is already obsolete.

>>11726856
>Is it reusable?
No, but the LM8 will presumably be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o0AUIlMXBg

>>11726863
>As if chinks will be able to perfect propulsive landings
Even if they do, starship will completely BTFO all currently operational and all planned rockets

>>11726869
Chinks dont need to BTFO Starship. If they can do propulsive landings, then they would have BTFO US/Russian gov.

>>11726875
Don't you realize US gov will just rent starship launches?

>>11726869
>As if chinks will be able to perfect propulsive landings
If SpaceX can do it by sacrificing enough boosters to Poseidon, then I think China can do the same.

>>11726738
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR4251.html

>>11726878
NASA is SpaceX's biggest partner, the DoD is the second biggest. Why would the US gov not use Starship, what else would they use, whatever garbage Blue Origin or Boeing makes. Nah.
>>11726869
>As if chinks will be able to perfect propulsive landings
The Chinks won’t, but the Ruskies might. After all they were the first to space.

>NBC copyright claimed NSF and Everyday Astronaut's demo 2 youtube streams
lol

>>11726886
Russia has also experienced decades of aerospace brain drain via emigration since the Soviet days. Look at what a shit show Su-57 / PAK-FA development was.

>>11726886
>Why would the US gov not use Starship
To give profits to SpaceX competitors. The USAF seems to be concerned about monopolies. Which I think is a good thing. SpaceX really needs a competitor to ensure that the company doesn't turn into another Boeing. Hopefully Blue Origin hasn't dropped the ball on that yet.

>>11726897
Starship will be multiple orders of magnitude cheaper to launch things into orbit then other launch platforms. Even if the predicted price is 5x higher then elon predicted, it's still around 66 dollars a kilogram to LEO, while other launch platforms are all over 1000 dollars a kilogram to LEO. It's simply too good of an advantage.

>>11726891
fuck the dmca

>>11726897
>Hopefully Blue Origin hasn't dropped the ball on that yet.
They have. Blue Origin soly exists to scratch Bezos’s ego.
>SpaceX really needs a competitor to ensure that the company doesn't turn into another Boeing.
Their is no good US based compition, at this point DARPA should just create a good competitor from scratch. Which is what they are doing with Astra.

>>11726891
Didn't last very long though. They really need to curb those fucking DMCA bots, especially on shit pertaining to NASA content.

>>11726891
For what?

>>11726704
Imagine if spacex is able to land men on mars before all of this

I'm surprised that Everyday Astronaut paid $1000 for better video access to the launch.

>>11726927
Can't have competitors scooping up your potential ad revenue, but really it was likely a mistake by the YouTube bot. It happens all the time, though for alot of smaller channels the process to get it fixed can take months, if it even gets fixed at all.

>>11726930
They should be able to land people on Marx by 2025. They might land people on Marx before China has reusable rockets.

>>11726930
I think it's possible for SpaceX to land humans on Mars by 2026 with the current pace of starship development. If they do, china and russia will be utterly BTFO'd.

>>11726944
What the fuck the autocorrect just sperged out Meant to say 2026 and Mars.

Apparently NBC had access to the same NASA video streams that NSF and EA had, so the bot assumed that they stole NBC's content.

>>11726953
it happens a lot. Someone will put out a documentary using public domain footage and then the algorithm claims all other videos containing the same public domain footage. Copyright law is completely fucked.

>>11726906
Fair enough. I know that Starship, if it works as intended, would be a game changer for the industry, but that could still allow a monopoly to form. While SpaceX is visionary now and wouldn't abuse a monopoly, that doesn't mean that they would do so later once the management changes. Again, Boeing had competent leadership and look what happened to them once they had control over most of the American aerospace industry.

>>11726911
>They have. Blue Origin soly exists to scratch Bezos’s ego.
They still have New Glenn coming up next year. I'd say if that fails or gets delayed significantly, then they really have dropped the ball.

>Astra
That company who tried to launch something from Alaska? What's up with them? It feels like they disappeared after that failed launch.

>>11726944
>be 2026
>Elon lands a Starship on the grave of Karl Marx
>communists around the world seethe

>>11726963
>grave incinerated by raptor exhausts

>>11726963
>>be 2026
>>Elon lands a Starship on the grave of Karl Marx
>>communists around the world seethe
literally doing what he did metaphorically on twitter the other day

>commies form coalition called koslovics to invade mars
>interplanetary war is real
>halo is real

>>11726704
If China can get over its NIH syndrome and use Russian engines, things could get interesting.

Static fire soon for SN4

>>11726986
no launch = no care

>>11726878
Fact of the matter is, US Gov/NASA/Russians/Europe/World still thinks propulsive landing is fake news or they can't do it themselves. SpaceX is currently the only one operating an orbital rocket that launches/lands. If China does theirs second, that's a HUGE one up on rest of the world, excluding SpaceX.

>>11727021
>still thinks propulsive landing is fake news
Why though? Because Shuttle was a disaster?

>>11727021
Did you just forget blue origin

Could an in-space transportation service be profitable, or does such a company have to own launch vehicles too?

>>11725504
>gay ass moeshit
>not meta CHADler
Bullshit.

Why don't you avatarfags put on trips so we filter you easier?

>>11727055
Once there is sufficient colonization of mars and perhaps ceres, it'll be able to be profitable probably. Once the outer planets start getting colonized, it'll be very profitable. You'll have probably have long rods with some sort of nuclear propulsion system and starships spinning around these rods, serving as crew quarters and landers/ascenders.

Get on Labpadre lads. SN4 is fuelled and Flare is big.

>>11727064
What about in the near future? Could a startup feasibly offer a service such as Rocket Lab's Photon space craft, but reusable?

>>11727068
No better stream? I fucking hate that camera.

>>11727085
NSF is way better. Static fire canceled anyways

>>11727085
Why is that view so wavey? It looks like SN4 is swaying in the wind. Is it due to some weird interpolation from the camera software?

>>11727093
It's a shitty digital stabilizer that they can't figure out how to fix.

>>11727085
My brain doesn't even acknowledge the shake. I'm a spastic tho.

>>11727098
I'm a bit spastic too and it almost gives me seizures.

>>11727079
No.

>>11726773
What causes the difference in time it takes to rendezvous with the ISS for all the potential launches they have where Dragon would be in the right orbit?

>>11726690

What America should have done in the 1970s and 80s.

>>11727088
Why?

>>11727174
>I disagree.

>>11727184
They're fueling up for another test now. We got condensation.
They don't tell us why they had to cancel.

>>11726690
>The three-module, 66-metric-ton space station will host three astronauts for six month rotations
If they're committing to continuously keep the station crewed, that's pretty nice, though it would also mean a big recurring cost for their space program.

>>11727188

Nixon was ill advised by NASA not earnestly fleshing out alternate to Shuttle option paths.

>>11726724

Is this new or an old image? Last we heard China was focusing on a larger expendable Falcon Heavy clone type vehicle.

Whoops, shit burning in boca chica for real.

Just Elon spilling his methane a bit, nothing exploding.

UPDATE: Public Notice of Cameron County Order to Temporarily Close State Highway 4 and Boca Chica Beach

Primary Date May 28, 2020 10:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. Closure Scheduled (extended for a further 2 hours)
Backup Date May 29, 2020 6:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date June 1, 2020 6:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. Closure Scheduled

Looks like they're having some serious issues with the methane judging by those flare stack burps, those fireballs are not normal.

>>11727154
The ISS orbit precesses. There are separate passes for KSC and Baikonur.

Siren just went off at Boca, static possibly about to happen at SN4.

>>11727345
Just under 5mins

>>11727252
>>11727263
>>11727345
Oh shit another static? If so thats gotta mean a hop is coming soon

Big flare should come soon.

>>11727174
Didn't they do it with the ISS?

Thar she blows.

Big BRAAAAAAAAAPER happening

yee

Static fire successful

>>11726243
it takes months for orbital procession to shift your plane

>>11726690
what inclination will they be putting their station up at?

>>11727388
Would it be feasible to use small pressure fed chemical rockets to raise to a higher orbital plane quicker?

>>11726773
No, the issue is that the plane changes
ten minutes is two and a half degrees of plane change

>>11727399
>Would it be feasible to just build a new rocket with more delta-v budget and bruteforce it?
Well of course, but we don't, because this is not Kerbal Space Program.

>>11727397
It says 43 degrees

>>11727383

>>11726704
Cant believe the russians are retarded enough to trust the chinks.

>>11727422
Money is a great motivator. Trust has little to do with it. This is all due to the whole "Russia did it" shitshow that's been playing for four fucking years.

>>11727370

*Instead of the Shuttle. As alternate human spaceflight program content in that era among other non shuttle investments.

>US+allies VS China+Russia on the Moon
Does that mean Russia is dipping out of the Gateway or will they join both Moon programs?

>>11727399
it requires a lot of DeltaV, and Dragon only has like 300 m/s or something

>>11727409
yup I should read posts before replying
>>11727441
Who knows? Maybe the Russian segment on the gateway will actually be the Chinese segment

>>11727426
The democrats have really burned a lot of bridges while trying to take down trump.

>>11727405
Ten minutes is still 40 degrees of ISS moving along its orbit, even without considering precession. At ground level that's like 4400km, and LEO is going to be a bit farther. Precession just makes it so you can't have a backup window 90 minutes later.