/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11750328
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orel_(spacecraft)

>>11752082
is that a "never" I hear?

>>11752072
Spaceflight?!
Science?
ELON MUSK?!!

Apologize

>>11752091
For what???

>>11752082
Interesting looking capsule. What’s with the tiled look?

Wonder if the succesful dragon2 mission will wake up some polticians in europe to the fact that ESA&europe will get left behind if they dont kick the european space exploration in a higher gear.

>>11752096
Carbon fiber maybe.

Can he establish ancapistan already, I'm tired of waiting

>>11752090
We are genuinely happy can you not just let us have our dorky thread

>>11752090
Elon has achieved beyond our cynicism.
He is definitely worthy of our respect and gratitude if his trend of success continues.

Is there any way to refuel a starship besides 8 other starship launches? Seems like that’s the worst part of the starship system really

>>11752129
Refueling is an issue.
But I believe the goal is to establish refueling operations in orbit, on the moon and on mars.
Even in orbit refueling station that can refine and produce fuels in space will significantly increase the US's mission reach.

>>11752129
is it 8 or is it only 6?

>>11752135
I forgot to mention, the investment of 8 launches or 6 to refuel starship is to get to the goal of establishing the bases I mentioned.

What was in these red bags lads?

>>11752143
as I said yesterday.
His blow up waifu

>>11752143
life vests, incase one of them goes overboard

>>11752143
Inflat-a-waifus.

>>11752135
Starship should be used for going to LEO only in my opinion.
Ships made in orbit with NTR drives should be the norm for interplantary travel in our solar system.

>>11752172
>idiotic opinion here

>>11752172
okay retard

>>11752172
gating interplanetary travel behind a robust enough orbital assembly platform (even if it does make sense, which it doesn't) is still a terrible idea

>>11752173
>>11752174
Smoothbrains.

>>11752177
NTR engine
>less fuel
>more cargo
>shorter travel time
In what world does it make more sense to do interplanetry travel with chemical rockets when NTR is a thing and they already figured out how to build it back in the 70's.

>>11752208
>In what world does it make more sense to do interplanetry travel with chemical rockets when NTR is a thing and they already figured out how to build it back in the 70's.

1. Zero actual working developed NTRs exist
2. Developing NTRs means acquiring uranium from the US government, which is a mountain of red tape and there’s no guarantee they will actually share
3. Chemical engines are much, much, much cheaper and actually physically exist and provide sufficient delta/v to get to Mars.

>>11752208
in what world does it make sense to do orbital assembly and nuclear for interplanetary travel when bog-standard chemical rockets will do just fine

>>11752211
>1. Zero actual working developed NTRs exist
The russians are working on it, one blow up about a year ago, and the US probably has some project running and still has all the data from the working NTR engines they build in the past.
>2. Developing NTRs means acquiring uranium from the US government, which is a mountain of red tape and there’s no guarantee they will actually share
The only real problem, but not a impossible one.
>3. Chemical engines are much, much, much cheaper and actually physically exist and provide sufficient delta/v to get to Mars.
Chemical rockets for interplanetary should only be a stopping gap.

>>11752217
More cargo, far shorter travel time, less fuel needed.

>>11752219
nuclear only get to choose one out of those things you suggested and also is shackled with fewer rockets because they're hideously more expensive

>>11752091
They're gonna wanna take credit.

>>11752219
>The only real problem, but not a impossible one.
the impossible problem is getting the clearance from the FAA (and NRC and maybe EPA) to launch large quantities of uranium on a chemical rocket from American soil

>>11752219
>The russians are working on it, one blow up about a year ago,

That’s an air-breathing ramjet, not a hydrogen-burning vacuum-optimized NTR

> and the US probably has some project running

Conjecture

> and still has all the data from the working NTR engines they build in the past.

Worth very little when all of the engineers are dead.

> The only real problem, but not a impossible one.

A problem big enough that we should just use chemical engines and not waste time spending years and years creating a new NTR

> Chemical rockets for interplanetary should only be a stopping gap.

200 year stop gap

so jannies finally did the cleanie cleanie... or newfags were btfo'd... either way, i'm happy

>>11752082
lets hope that this works on time

Did Chris beat the Slav?

>>11752129
If someone can figure out how to harvest methane and oxygen from a NEA and truck it over, then sure.

>>11752219
>The russians are working on it, one blow up about a year ago, and the US probably has some project running and still has all the data from the working NTR engines they build in the past.
Nuclear power is the only thing that can save Russian space industry at this point
ESA will probably keep buying Soyuz tickets for a while, but there's nothing stopping them from flying with SpaceX like NASA

If you think Boing is fucked, RKK Energia is fucked 3 times over

>>11752129
Refueling in the bread and butter of modern aviation, doing it in space could double or triple the amount of payload a single rocket could launch to beyond Earth’s Orbit.

>>11752284
Roskosmos might have some use in cooperating with NASA and ESA for LOP-G.
>>11752284
>If you think Boing is fucked, RKK Energia is fucked 3 times over
Boeing is a private company that does what they want. Roskosmos is meant to represent over a hundred million people which is what makes their downfall so sad.

>>11752263
I’ll be impressed if he did. Chess is all they care about.

>>11752138
8 for a full tank, but it probably doesn't need to be a full tank for most missions 2bh

>>11752228
ffs sake please either #lern2format or go back

>>11752377
>Get out of my clubhouse I don’t like how you arrange sentences on a Cambodian basket weaving forum

Lol

Reminder, SpaceX will launch more payloads to orbit this year than any other rockets combined together.

>>11752377
imagine this is your only counter argument to what he said

>Live Event with NASA Astronauts in Space

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3hdoRqA-5M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3hdoRqA-5M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3hdoRqA-5M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3hdoRqA-5M

How does one motivate themselves working for a space company other than space x, must be disheartening knowing what ever you make will be inferior.

Cassidy looks bored as hell

>>11752290
There are a couple complications, like sloshing in the tanks and the changing of the center of mass of both vehicles as a large quantity of mass shifts from one to the other. Frankly though I don't get the huge fuss being made over it, the refueling vehicle and it's fuel recipient are made with tanks of equivalent pressures (Starship for example is like 8-10 bar max I think). The nearly empty vehicle vents whatever remains of it's propellant to vacuum, completely emptying the tank and then closes back up, the tanker attaches to it either ASS TO ASS or just using a boom of some kind and opens a valve to it's own full propellant tank, a small pump may be needed to help some of the last of the propellant out however suction from the other tank being empty ought to do most of the work. If their is any sloshing, RCS thrusters can be used to by both vehicles fired at a synchronized moment to settle the liquids in both tanks.

god these questions are so stupid and lame

>what were your emotions
>describe what that felt like
>blahblahblah

>>11752553
Bob and Doug got some Elon-itis. Hogging the spotlight and getting everybody else ignored.

>>11752568
Hey, don’t be mean. You ought to be emotional seeing men lifted into the sky

TDRS cut off? That ended abruptly.

>>11752552
>must be disheartening knowing what ever you make will be inferior.
more disheartening is realizing that all your roadblocks are manufactured and bureaucratic and there's actually nothing stopping you from just getting it done except a lack of willpower.

>>11752580
They couldn't take any more stupid, repetitive questions from local news media

>>11752602
Too bad. I was hoping somebody would've asked Chris Cassidy if he has checked out Crew Dragon.

>>11752610
I was wondering that too, if they let the cosmonauts check out the dragon interior of if they're not allowed in for some reason (presumably a safety reason).

>>11752617
too bad no one thinks to ask any actual interesting questions like that

>>11752622
TBF, a question like that is somewhat of a hot one and might end up with unfortunate political consequences depending on how it is answered.

>>11752617
Why would they not? It's not military hardware. Also it's not like Elon splashed the interior all over the internet.

>>11752381
LEAAAARRRRRNNNNNN
TOOOOOOOOO
FORMMMMMATTTTTT
OOOOOHHHHHH

pls, its a simple fucking courtesy for other people you cum-guzzlling animal torturing pieces of shit.

> Worth very little when all of the engineers are dead.
Ridiculous, people leave companies all the time, we now live in an era where you don't have to suck dick for your entire career. Knowledge persists and often advances more when the old hands in charge leave.

> 200 year stop gap
Not even deserving of being called conjecture, well possible within the next few decades


You cunts have convinced me though, I will now clog this place up with completely unnecessary whitespace. Enjoy it fuckheads. GATTACA!!!!!!

>>11752652
sweaty engineers being dead is why we can't rebuild the f1

>>11752640
since it's a test vehicle maybe they don't want people poking around it who aren't trained to use it in case something goes wrong

Gas core rockets shitting all over your shithouse riot cities

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PL-Y1F_k9w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PL-Y1F_k9w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PL-Y1F_k9w

>>11752657
>cosmonauts are retarded children who will press all the buttons
the arrogance of americans never ceases to amaze

>>11752660
>gajin

>>11752656
C
O
O
L
B
R
O
You totally right and it's 100% impossible.
1
0
0
%

>>11752668
maybe if you weren't a freshman/sophomore that has never held a wrench in his life you'd know there's more to manufacturing than just copying the diagram in the book

>>11752680
<knowingly chuckles>
enjoy yourself little man

>>11752662
>you should give a tour of a mid-test experimental new spacecraft because you can trust them not to float into buttons
either way, it likely comes down to insurance anyway

>>11752652
>Ridiculous, people leave companies all the time, we now live in an era where you don't have to suck dick for your entire career. Knowledge persists and often advances more when the old hands in charge leave.

Constructing something like an engine is way more complicated than just looking at a schematic

> Not even deserving of being called conjecture, well possible within the next few decades

Chemical thrusters work just fine for the job

>>11752091
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6CqdrbWVg_M
still holds true, considering what a horrible bastard elon’s father is. Interesting what south africans will take credit for and what they will vehemently deny, ignore, or claim no party to

>>11752129
What are the plans for starship refueling? Is it another starship with the cargo area replaced by tanks, like the milk cow U-boats? Would the propulsion tanks and the feeder tank in the milk cow cross feed to feed more fuel from them?
Would it dock from the nose into a refueling dock on the receiving starship?
These are important questions

>hot summer weather outside
>I just remain in my bed trying to do geo/space research on my laptop
>Trying to setup various packages to see if available NASA data can be loaded and edited the way I need it
>Spend some time cooking, cleaning, then communicate with family via telemetry

>This is my day everyday

I might as well be living on the fucking space station lads

>>11752745
Get a big ass rocket to launch your house Anon
Also do some indoor gardening and recycling experiments while you’re at it

>>11752680
Idunno my ultra brainlet popsci parroting friend, Pratt&Whitney-Rocketdyne and Dynetics who designed and proposed the F1-B modern F1 variant would probably disagree. This is just a guess but I think they might know just a little bit more about the F1 than you have deluded yourself into believing you do.

>>11752772
It's not that we can't build them.
The reason the pyrios boosters were thrown aside was A) they want the fucking SRBs come hell or high water because fucking warhead tech and B) they are too fucking powerful for the rest of the orange turd.

Is Starship a meme?

>>11752786
I know, it's a real shame. The Pyrios boosters would have actually created a reason for SLS to be used in favor of any other competitor too, because out of the gate they would have given SLS a 150MT lift capacity with another 20MT on top after uprating. At that point you could have even made a valid argument that SLS still has a purpose because using the Pyrios boosters it could launch up to 170 ton single piece large payloads.
As is, with S(hit)RBs it's got subpar lifting capabilities considering it's size, cost, and manufacturing cycle time, basically unjustifiably anemic especially with the absolute dogshit Interim Propulsion Stage, since the fucking Yuropoors can't get their shit together and deliver the Exploration Propulsion Stage anytime soon, just another reason why collaborating with other """countries""" is just going to cause more stagnation in the space industry.

>>11752812
no

>>11752812
Not really, but people should really listen to Elon when he's saying he's being overly optimistic regarding time frames.

>>11752772
it's basically a clean sheet

>>11752812
it was a meme about 6 months ago, but it has progressed so rapidly it would be naive not to take it seriously at this point. Of course add 150% onto any Musk timeline, but there's no reason to believe that they won't get there eventually. Even Shotwell seems optimistic.

>>11752813
>just another reason why collaborating with other """countries""" is just going to cause more stagnation in the space industry
It's one of those things that's a relic of the Cold War that people keep doing on autopilot. At least Canada and Japan provide useful contributions, but ESA is a bad joke.

>>11752815
>>11752820
>>11752828
What about costs?

>>11752833
What about costs? You can't calculate costs on something that's nowhere near finished. Nobody knows when it'll fly, if it'll fly or how much it'll carry.

>>11752830
ESA is held back by language and cultural barriers

>>11752786
>The reason the pyrios boosters were thrown aside was A) they want the fucking SRBs come hell or high water because fucking warhead tech and B) they are too fucking powerful for the rest of the orange turd.
Why not two of each? All the boosters have a TWR >1 so that would only help, right? A dedicated 200t expendable launch platform would be fucking sick.

>>11752833
a billionaire's personal fortune?

>>11752844
Because SLS isn't about putting shit into orbit, but about bringing Boeing jobs and the like into various constituencies.

>>11752863
Pratt & Whitney could spread F-1B parts over a dozen districts. They have a factory in rural Maine, for fuck's sake.

>>11752866
Yeah, but you're forgetting the ICBM tech aspect of the SRBs.

>>11752868
That's why I said two of each. Two SRBs and two liquid boosters.

>>11752871
Why would they do that?

>>11752874
200t launch capacity, duh.

>>11752875
Read again, it's not about putting shit into orbit. SLS is weak as fuck, even if block 2 should materialize, it'll be less capable than Saturn V.

>>11752880
Get the cum out of your eyes, faggot. You're talking in circles because you're NOT READING THE POSTS.
>YES IT'S ABOUT JOBS/MONEY AS WELL AS PUTTING SHIT IN ORBIT
>SO ADD MORE POWERFUL BOOSTERS TO THE EXISTING DESIGN TO FIX THE WEAKNESS AS A HEAVY LIFTER
>WITHOUT REMOVING ANY OTHER PARTS AND THUS ANY OTHER JOBS
Kill yourself.

>>11752888
But SLS isn't about putting shit into orbit. Pyrios was deemed "too powerful". Do you have reading comprehension issues?

>>11752890
>Pyrios was deemed "too powerful".
Because they didn't want to Kerbal it up with four boosters and reinforcement.

>>11752892
No, because they're fucking retarded and dead set on using hydrolox at sea level because MUH SPECIFIC IMPULSE.

>>11752263
Ivan in the back seems like a good dude

This is gonna sound weird but does anyone read space technical reports for fun? Like I’ll google “Mars DRM 3.0” and I’ll read some reports for fun.

I spend a lot of time planning Mars missions and space probes and fictional ISS resupoly missions in alternate history scenarios in my head because it’s really fun.

Does anyone else do this. Right now I’m working on a concept of a spacecraft that is launched by a Minotaur I into LEO and boosted to an elliptical HEO by a Star 27 stage. The spacecraft is two parts, one section is a small, 50kg cylindrical bus, and the other is the 46 kg sample return capsule which is identical to Stardust’s return capsule. Anyhow after launching into this orbit, it deploys the big aerogel sample collector array and just collects dust as it travels. The array will always have one side facing “forward” and another facing “backward”, and it will use small reaction wheels to stay oriented this was 24/7. The purpose of having a “forward and backward” side is to allow dust impacts from Earth sources on the forward side, and extraterrestrial sources on the backwards. After 300 days in orbit, it deorbits, and the capsule separates. The bus is destroyed, but the capsule lands in Nevada. The purpose of the mission is to collect interstellar dust grains for study.

But yeah I spend a lot of time doing this. I do a lot of math to make sure the missions work. I’m also working on an alternate history where DIRECT was selected in 2010, and yeah.

>+1.1 Mil subscribers in a day
I know SpaceX doesn't really care about their youtube stats, but it's a great way of showing how big of a deal the launch was for normalfags
https://socialblade.com/youtube/user/spacexchannel

>>11752918
why do you keep posting this brown girl

>>11752925
by google trends search interest this was their biggest event yet (FH was almost as big)

>>11752927
Sorry bro it was the first image I could find I’ll post another one

>>11752933
posting an image is not required

>>11752933
so are you stalking that girl or?

>>11752938
Nah we used to date

>>11752941
bit creepy of you to post her here constantly lad

>>11752956
Yeah this.

Methalox F-1B when?

>>11752972
I had this thought a while ago in regards to Superheavy. Obviously we've never seen 30+ Raptor engines fired in synch before and I worry that just like N1 there will be serious issues with reliability using that many. The obvious solution would be to design a much larger LOX/CH4 engine something along the lines of a very much upscaled Merlin engine. Relatively simple plumbing and engineering, highly reliable and throttleable, easy to mass produce.

>>11752833
Most of the prototypes are tin cans so they are dirt cheep to make, besides the army signed a three billion dollar contract with SpaceX regarding Starlink so SpaceX has the cash available.

>>11752257
>russia will have a moon base by 2015

>>11752983
what if they do

>>11752290
How much all the fuel + operating all the vehicles involved in the refueling process etc. going to cost if you have to refuel a single Starship 8 times?

>>11752983
Aren't they going to be busy claiming that Elon stole Falcon 9 and Crew Dragon from them going forward?

>>11752772
F1-B is what you build when you forget everything about how to build an F-1 but want something vaguely similar from a normie perspective.

>>11752983
>he doesn't know

>>11752172
>NTR Drives
Stop spending so much time on /h/.

>>11752994
Except for that little fact that the F1-B is superior to the F1 in every measurable metric. It doesn't really lose efficiency for discarding the exhaust gas recycler, it has superior thrust, would have been more reliable due to consolidation of components and superior fit and finish, is lighter, and can be throttled for superior control. The F1 was not hyper complex because that was the best way to build it, it was hyper complex because with the inferior technology of the time it was built there was no other way to get the job done.
If you want to jack off over how much longer it would take to assemble and fit out an F1, how much extra human tweaking it took to prevent the rocket from shitting itself and exploding, go right on ahead, but don't insult more intelligent people than yourself by pretending that makes it a better or more advanced rocket.
Excessive complexity results from lack of optimization, not superior design.

>Burger: After a false copyright claim scrubbed them, NASA's launch videos are back online.

Hoes mad

>>11753006
YouTube is such a fucking joke these days I swear.

>>11753004
>The F1 was not hyper complex because that was the best way to build it, it was hyper complex because with the inferior technology of the time it was built there was no other way to get the job done.
I think it was also due to the rushed nature of Apollo. It is faster to make a complex hand-fitted engine than setting up a production like of simpler engines. Especially if the total amount of engines made isn't expected to be high.

>>11752843
The entire EU is held back by language and cultural barriers. People can larp all they want about how you can just move to another eu country and work for a company there. Even if they speak english at the workplace, once you're off work you're interacting with a country that speaks their language and has their own culture.
I really wish ESA focused on getting it's own reusable heavy lift vehicle, but we all know that's not gonna happen

I just interviewed at SpaceX for a job and ultimately got turned down. Separately, I interviewed at Blue Origin, and I also know folks at Orbital Sciences and SpaceX.

Would you all be interested in hearing me blog about this right here and now?

>>11753017
Might as well, why not.

>>11753017
sure

>>11752563
>The nearly empty vehicle vents whatever remains of it's propellant to vacuum, completely emptying the tank and then closes back up
Wait a minute, so how does this work when you want to add more the one load of fuel?

>>11752974
Not a good idea. First of all, N1 had issues because the first stage had to be assembled at the launch site and they didn't have a test stand for it. Second, their rudimentary control software meant that at the first sign of engine trouble the computer pretty much shut down the entire stage.

The idea of issues arising from the clustering of engines actually owes itself to the development of the Space Shuttle, not the N1. The RS-25 main engine went through development hell in order to get its high expansion ratio nozzle working without vibrations from adjacent engines causing it to blow itself up. Go watch high speed footage of the Shuttle ignition and you'll see just how much those engines flexed and wobbled during startup. Raptor doesn't have nearly that large an expansion ratio in the sea level version, and the vacuum version is operating in vacuum so there won't be any sound wave issues.

>>11753023
They also did not static fire test all engines, if I'm not misremembering things (because it sounds pretty fucking strange). N1 had a lot of issues because of the mindless haste. In any normal situation, of course, this would not be an issue.

Dual Starship stacking operations at SpaceX Boca Chica!

SN5 stacked on the left. SN6 stacking on the right!

>>11753004
>don't insult more intelligent people than yourself by pretending that makes it a better or more advanced rocket
Imagine thinking that I at any point said that the original F-1 was a better design.

>>11753015
Euros are doing a few studies on reusable boosters:
https://www.fromspacewithlove.com/callisto-rocket/
https://www.space.com/arianeworks-reusable-rockets-themis-callisto-video.html

https://spacenews.com/germany-begins-reusability-study-to-capture-rockets-in-midair/
https://www.space.com/germany-begins-reusability-study-to-capture-rockets-in-midair-and-land-them-with-a-plane.html

>"It's not anything to do with the Falcon rocket of SpaceX," he said. "What is behind FALCon is really the Falcon bird. The Falcon bird goes into a dive maneuver to capture other birds or animals, so it is really inspired by the Falcon bird."
haha wtf

>>11753028
They did not test the N1 engines at all. Rather, from every batch they tested (expended) n number of engines and if any failed the entire batch was thrown out.

>>11753018
>>11753019


My friend and former roommate is an electrical engineer at orbital. When I graduated from college 8 years ago I asked her about working at Orbital and she said that orbital doesnt hire people without stem degrees (so, not me) due to liability concerns. What if a non-stem person fucks everything up? Then Orbital would look bad. So I never pursued working at Orbital after that.

Fast forward to today, I am an unemployed programmer due to coronavirus. So I have been looking around for jobs.

I applied to Blue Origin and did one interview. It was a really boring interview. Naturally I was really excited going in because its an awesome space exploration company, but the technology the interviewer talked about was really lame and it made the job sound really unfun. Low energy interviewer too.

I ended up getting a really cool job offer at a non-space related company and on the same day I got the offer, my old friend at SpaceX called me and said they need programmers for Starlink and asked if I want to interview. I said "Joining SpaceX would be awesome, but we would have to start interviewing today since I am ready to accept this job offer". He said its no problem, that when he interviewed he got an offer on the same day. I literally started interviewing like the next hour after he first reached out to me, and over the next 48 hours I think I talked to 10 different people on the phone for a total of 5 hours.

They got back to me earlier today. I guess they liked me and thought I was a good cultural fit but I didnt do well enough on the code whiteboard stuff. They invited me to interview again in the future. This is all not a big surprise, we all knew going in that the domain of programming I was interviewing for was really different from my career so far.

>>11753021
Then you'd definitely have to rely on a series of pumps, at least one for LOX and one for CH4. Probably on the side of the vehicle in need of a refuel, so it can SIPP propellant from the tanker, if the tanker is passive with only valves to hold it's tanks closed that gives it more room to carry more spare propellant.
>>11753023
>Cluster engine issues owed to the development of the Space Shuttle.
You know what, this doesn't actually surprise me at all. The more I learn about the RS-25 the more it strikes me as the kind of engine that's good at being ogled like a Formula-1 car and not much else.
Probably cheaper and less time intensive to build an F1 car than an RS-25 too.

>>11753050
>I guess they liked me and thought I was a good cultural fit but I didnt do well enough on the code whiteboard stuff. They invited me to interview again in the future.

>>11752983
>Russia is really big. Did you know we own the M-O-O-N?

>>11753050
Time to grind leetcode?

>>11753039
>in air capturing
Hardcore
>>11753041
Fucking hell. I'm reading more about it now, they used pyrotechnics to save on weight, so once they were fired they were done for.
Was the poor thing designed taking into account a fraction of its primary stage engines from not working at all, supposing it doesn't somehow blow up, because of the missing testing? More broadly, could their approach of "build more till it doesn't blow up anymore" ever work out on that design? Which was flawed from its inception to me from what I see, for example the spherical fuel tanks because of lacking machining capabilities on that scale. Energia was much more well thought out, but by then they were on life support..
Whenever I read about it I feel sad because it looked so cute.

>>11753062

Starlink launch 2 days from now

>>11753085
Haven't they got like 14 more launches this year?

>>11753090
They'll want to speed it up. I think Shotwell also said by the 14th launch of Starlink, they can do Public beta test.

>>11753030
For what purpose? Do they have a second test stand already? Did they unfuck the first one already?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cr87EKHFASA

>>11752492
and most of it will be their own StarLink satellites!

Let's say a hypothetical dragon or shepard mission needs to abort during launch, the capsule lands somewhere on land. Do they wait for a full hazmat team to scrub the area of any hypergolics left or what?

>>11753096
they were seen building a 2nd stand since 2 weeks ago
the first one is totaled i think, the latest video on youtube has them taking pieces off

>>11753085
Didn't they just blow up a test version a couple of days ago?

>>11753115
They wait 3 hours while trying to get the mic to work before opening the hatch

>>11753062

>>11753123
Unrelated

>>11753053
>Then you'd definitely have to rely on a series of pumps, at least one for LOX and one for CH4.
No, use ullage thrust to settle propellants and use differential tank pressure to force liquid across.

>>11753076

>>11753126
LMAOOO

>>11753039
This is pointlessly convoluted for absolutely no reason and I expected nothing less from the Germans

>>11753141
Holy fucking kek.

>>11753126
>Yes, Neil Armstrong
[patriotic airhorns]

>>11753168
UNITED STATES
S
A

>>11753053
>Probably cheaper and less time intensive to build an F1 car than an RS-25 too.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/05/nasa-will-pay-a-staggering-146-million-for-each-sls-rocket-engine/

>>11753168
It could be their flags there...if they weren't so lazy.

>>11753115
>needs to abort during launch
>the capsule lands somewhere on land
That literally can't happen with Dragon 2 because they launch from the coast and the launch abort system pushes it over the water. And it's probably BTFO it hits ground anyhow, because it's designed for splashdown.
I don't know the details about New Shepard fuels, but since it's only SUB-ORBITAL, it was going to end up on nearby land anyhow.

>>11752101
Lets hope. European citizens should be protesting

>>11753216
European citizens are currently posting for a feral ape that got kneeled on by a zookeeper in Minnesota. That whole continent is a bad joke.

>>11753224
>the US's contributions have to be minimized just so everyone else is visible at all
This seems familiar.

>>11753219
EU media =/= EU citizens
Most of look down on these roiters using the excuse of some dead dude and a retarded cop to burn&steal.

>>11753224
>mexico space program
does that include KSP?

>>11753244
I think it's the taco trucks for Boca Chica.

>>11753168

>>11753168
>[patriotic airhorns]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrEn6Bl185o

>>11753050
Can you, in detail, describe the whiteboard questions for starlink? What kind of tech stack, what they gave you to work with etc. I’m super interested in that

>>11753296
Nice try, Chang

>>11753317
I hope you’re not the person I replied to. Fuck China, obviously, I’m also a programmer and it would be a dream to one day work on something like Starlink and this is the only time I’ve (supposedly) spoken to someone who’s been related to SpaceX hiring at all

>>11753141
Jesus fuck launch a FH to search for my sides.

>>11753224
That's nominal dollars. If you convert to PPP, you see a much closer image. Chinese space agency isn't paying everyone in dollars, they're paying it in YUAN. Russians aren't paying their employees in dollars, they're paying in RUBLES. PPP is what each country's equivalent exchange rate is accounting for inflation in each country.

>>11753331
could you convert it into gallons of milk please?

>Starliner isn't scheduled until may 2021

the absolute state of Boeing

>>11753331
Fuck off wumao. Don't you have a funeral to attend for villagers crushed by falling boosters?

>>11753336
>Starship may orbit unmanned before Starliner does

>>11753336
It's pretty sad actually. Also, no redundancy if there's a failure before then.

>>11753336
Can't wait until this general is flooded with Boeing apologists.

>the boeing space suits

oh no no no

>>11753361
What is this, fucking Soyuz?

>>11753336
You of course mean the completely unmanned retest ordered by NASA before they will man-rate the capsule, yes? I'm sure we can see a Starliner manned flight in late 2022-23, an incredible feat of daring and very fast paced progress for Boing!

>>11753361
I quite like the Boeing suits desu. They have a "functionality is a fashion of it's own" quality. They'd be cooler if they were SR-71 flight suit orange though. Hopefully the quality of the suits are better than what Starliner showed. There's no code in a space suit to mess up, right?

>>11753296

Sure.

So, its hardware programming, and they use C++. Company-wide they use languages other than C++ as well, just because lots of engineers need to do a little programmer but are not full time programmers.

I had three 30 minute white board code interviews with three different people. None of them were really about writing out a working program at the end. That wouldn't actually have been possible. It was more about talking through a problem and writing code together.

The first one was about writing out a program to listen for a sequence of knocks over time, kind of like morse code, and then checking if it was a particular sequence, kind of like a password.

The second one about writing a function that turns an integer into a string.

The third one we actually wrote no code at all, even though we had a shared online code editor, and we just talked about different approaches to big architectural problems one might face when trying to build a system like Starlink. He seemed to be drawing from their actual programming challenges.

I am pretty sure the parameters of each code session was just the whim of the individual interviewer and I think each interviewer that talked to me could have chosen whether or not we would be coding together or just talking. In the interview sessions where we were not pair coding, we still talked about code, but it was mostly me talking about myself and the code I have written.

>>11753331
Correct, though spaceflight equipment is part of the baskets of goods and services used for computing PPP. Overall nominal -> PPP inflator for China looks to be about 2x, so china should be around 11.000 billion

>>11753126
That man's country collapsed! Give him a break, anon!

>>11753369
>reddit spacing

>>11753366
>no snoopy cap

>>11753369
That sounds similar to our hiring process for SDEs.

t. Amazonian

>>11753380
Hey do you like Amazon?

I got an Amazon interview, but I cancelled it when I got a better offer. The tech on the amazon job didnt sound very fun. I have heard people say Amazon is really brutally competitive internally, and that its not fun, and also that its really business and customer value driven in their internal processes. Is any of that true?

>>11753347
Not if their ground equipment keeps blowing up prototypes and test stands

>>11753389
The cardinal rule of Amazon is "it varies by team," because the two-pizza rule creates a whole bunch of small teams with lots of autonomy. There's also a fairly significant cultural split between AWS and the retail side.
> I have heard people say Amazon is really brutally competitive internally, and that its not fun,
This is much more true on the retail side of things.
>and also that its really business and customer value driven in their internal processes
Yes.

Tech wise there's a huge spread of languages, with Java the largest one, but there's also some C/C++ in performance critical areas and we're introducing Rust as well. The hypervisor behind AWS Lambda is written in Rust, for example. Python and Ruby are used a bit but not for fast-path stuff.

If you're looking for /sfg/ development jobs in Amazon, we have openings in two organizations. On the retail side, we have our own satellite ISP division Project Kuiper. On the AWS side, we have AWS Ground Station, which is ground-station-as-a-service that lets you rent time on our dishes and dump your data straight into an AWS account right off the antenna.

>>11753361
They don't look so bad here >>11753366, they do look clunkier than SpaceX suits though

>>11753423
based scott

>>11752082
I think it looks nice, sleek and modern but still distinctly Russian.

>>11753336
Boeing should just abandon space and just make Airliners at this point. Oh wait they can’t even do that.

>>11753369
Wow that’s pretty general stuff, I was expecting mainly physics related questions, but I suppose that makes sense. What did you talk about in the third interview in regards to architecture? Thanks for the response and don’t mind the grouch bitching about reddit spacing

>>11753423
>SPACE MAN BAD

>>11753454
The job was for the Starlink project, so there are a lot of different pieces of hardware involved in Starlink, but the questions he was asking me were mostly about the unique challenges of programming satellites. For example, once the Satellite is in space you cant physically go to it and fix it if it breaks. But you still need to give it software updates when its in space, and every software update risks breaking it. So its very important that the system is robust in such a way that you cant break it by sending it bad code. For example, if you accidentally upload code to it that accidentally permanently shuts off the radio antenna then you have just broken a satellite that cost a shit ton of money to put into space.

We also talked about how flakey electronics can be in space due to things like signals being noisy or radiation fucking things up, and how to write software to be tolerant to those kinds of failures.

So uh what’s next?

>>11753486
Mixed some rubber cement and saltpeter to see if it's usable as a solid propellant. Gonna light it tomorrow after it dries.

>>11753491
Imagine the fumes.
Cogitate upon the potential aroma.

>>11752143
spacehoppers!

geddit

>>11753423
Elon is a god

>>11753510
I wouldn't go that far. He's just a guy with autism, money, a dream, and the ability to find really good people instead of getting scammed.

>>11753479
Nice dude that’s great info, thanks. Sorry you didn’t get the job but best of luck to you and I hope you apply again later. I don’t see these kinds of programming jobs going away anytime soon

>>11753423
I get what he means, but I don't think all of that $20B the SLS went to Boeing.

>>11753519
He wasn't talking about the SLS necessarily. That quote can be applied to every fucking program NASA has ever run before the commercial crew program. It's been cost plus for EVERYTHING.

>>11753519
>corporation like Boeing
Lockheed Martin and Airbus are doing Orion, for example.

>>11753512
I fully intend to pray to Elon when he ascends through Neuralink

>>11752492
Are you talking all-time? Because that's going to happen at some point isn't it? More satellites launched by SpaceX than all other organisations ever put together. That's a seriously sobering fact for SpaceX's competitors.

>>11753510
I can unironically see him being worshipped as something like a god if he pulls off Mars and other stuff. He's a far more worshippable character than horrible Steve fucking Jobs

>>11753447
mini kek

pic unrelated

>>11753547
>Elon dies and immediately becomes the Autism God of spacefaggotry and rocket building from /sfg/‘s worship
>/Sci/‘s Mars city would house a cathedral to Him

>>11753366
Why does it remind me of this

>>11753525
>Elon uses Neuralink to become the Demiurge of Mars, declares holy Jihad on Earth and uses Fusion Raptor engines to accelerate Phobos into a collision course.

>Russia wants to build their own space station by re-using their part of the current space station

surely ruskies aren't this dumb? why wouldn't you collaborate with NASA and ESA?

>>11753513
Youre welcome. Have a good one.

>>11753573
This is planned for when ISS gets decommissioned.

>>11753573
it's a contingency plan for when relations break down

What is the purpose of Dragon and Starliner if the space station is getting decommissioned soon and Lockheed have already built the Orion spacecraft that will travel between Earth and the Moon & Mars?

>>11753547
>He's a far more worshippable character than horrible Steve fucking Jobs
So true. SpaceX does innovation, Apple does the ascetics of innovation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BnLbv6QYcA

>>11753573
Roskosmos is collaborating with NASA and ESA for LOP-G. LOP-G is way more important then ISS 2.0 it is very important to see how being outside the Van Allen Belts affects human health.

>>11753573
It looks really bad to need help from another country just to build your own new space station which is already based on your previous half a space station which was attached to a previous joint space station. It sounds like the primary purpose of the new station is just to reinforce Russian's pride in their nation's space program. I say that's cool, I want as many different space stations in orbit as possible.

>>11753609
both can also go to the moon iirc, so redundancy

>>11753609
To go to the space station, or a successor station, as they probably wouldn't change the docking system.
If Congress had funded Commercial Crew to the level Congress desired, this milestone would've been achieved years ago, and the whole program would seem more sensible.

>>11753609
ISS won’t be decommissioned until 2028, and that date will likely get pushed back. The ISS has two purposes. Research and Diplomacy. Even if it had no scientific usage it. It’s Diplomatic importance will allow it to continue to get funding until a new space station that consists of many different countries gets built.

>>11753622
>If Congress had funded Commercial Crew to the level Congress desired, this milestone would've been achieved years ago, and the whole program would seem more sensible.
Mandatory IQ tests for Congressmen when?

>>11753366
that looks awkward and clunks as hell... it also makes him look like about 100 lbs fatter than he probably is

>>11753622
*to the level NASA desired
They couldn't keep sending billions to Roscosmos indefinitely.

>future generations will make the ISS into a 5$ museum attraction to visit on your trip back from the Moon or Mars
>kids will laugh at how primitive we were

>>11753630
If Roskosmos just kept the price at 20 million commercial crew would have never occurred.

>>11753630
I wonder how long until Roscosmos loses enough money to have to start laying off it's employees thus starting another roaming rocket engineer crisis.

>>11753615
>it is very important to see how being outside the Van Allen Belts affects human health.
Are you being sarcastic?

>>11753633
As they should. It's pathetic how so many people are still so reverent of the Apollo program.

>>11753558
>>/Sci/‘s Mars city would house a cathedral to Him
The cathedral organ would be based on Moonbase Alpha TTS.

>>11753660
The US and EU won’t let that happen because if it does then those scientists might go to a rouge state of China for work. Roskosmos was invited to participate in LOP-G for a reason.
>>11753662
No, if you want to send people to Mars you need to deal with the radiation from Deep Space. People will learn how to deal with it in LOP-G.

>>11753681
>People will learn how to deal with it in LOP-G.
Yeah, and do you know what the solution will be?
"Nothing we can do to shield it, nothing we can really do about it at all except get to our destination quickly and get under the ground".
There, I just saved the space program $50 billion dollars, now we can start drawing up Moon base and Mars base designs and focus on developing the equipment we need on the ground in those places.

>>11753686
The difference is that a tin can orbital station is something Roscosmos can conceivably contribute to without being openly a third rate relic program helped along by NASA and SpaceX. Lunar surface bases not so much.

>>11753674
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzKWbpSNkmk

>>11753689
Fuck em. It's there problem. We can't afford to just stall progress in space forever because some
one can't get their shit together. They can either compete, or they can buy seats on rockets built by those who can.

>>11753686
You're forgetting that LOP-G is strategically placed to be applicable to the space dreams of any administration short of one that just wants to cancel NASA. The president wants to go to the moon? It's a moon space station! The president want to go to Mars? It's the core of a Mars transfer spacecraft. Asteroids? Platform to stage a capture mission. None of the above? It's technically not orbiting the moon so all is good. LOP-G doesn't have a goal by design.

Dragon looks a lot more comfy than Orion

Can you imagine a 9 month trip to Mars in this thing

>>11753699
Reminder that NASA considered deleting the toilets off Orion to meet the mass budget of early SLS.

>>11753662
Part of the rationale for the ISS is to experiment on how microg effects the human body.
That would be the logical next step.

>>11753694
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdRYthkSwvI

IMAGINE spending 9 (nine) months in this shitbox with 3 other people

>>11753719
>locked in a tin can with two other astronauts
>for 9 months
>one of them is a coomer

>>11753699
>>11753701
Why not just experiment with induced torpor and how to wake up the crew when you get there?
Save on mass, food, space, risk of crew murdering each other and radiation

>>11753724
Contemplate the odour.

>>11753697
I don't disagree, but fuck it anyway.
I don't care if specializing the thing makes it more likely to be cancelled, because having it completely unspecialized makes it worthless.

>>11753725
>why not just waste more time and money instead of having a chance of doing anything

>>11753736
>I don't care if specializing the thing makes it more likely to be cancelled, because having it completely unspecialized makes it worthless.
Not true. Look at the SLS. "Just restart a program with old parts" is NEVER simple. The only way to maintain expertise is to keep building and launching shit. LOP-G is the bureaucratic equivalent of curling up in a ball and sobbing until daddy stops beating you.

>>11753738
Nigga, most of the groundwork is done

https://academic.oup.com/biohorizons/article/doi/10.1093/biohorizons/hzy002/4969915
All we need are some simple, rather cheap experiments to see what would work in inducing hibernation and awakening safely from it
It’s a good cost vs. benefits for long spaceflights

>space force still pushing for intel for lunar activities
but will they help fund artemis?

>>11753774
Probably. Space Force is desk jockeys without launch vehicles and spacecraft and stations.

>>11753756
5+ years away for human experiments optimistically, and high likelihood of hitting some wall that kills the idea forever.

>>11753224
BASED MOROCCO
ALGERITARDS BTFO

>>11753788
We test it on mice, find out what works
Kidnap some junkies, perform the revise procedures on them
Science never got anywhere by being ethical

>>11752072

I love how the Russians are playing nice but they're just sort of looking nonplussed and disinterested lmao

>>11752082
it looks like a water tank.

>>11753835
>HATO dogs finally build their own space capsule
>it docks to the ISS (Mir-II) and you open the airlock
>HIYA IM DOUG FROM NEW YORK AND THIS IS BOB FROM MISSOURI HOWAYAGOING

>>11753039
Why do this? Why not use a similar approach to blue origin or spaced? It’s been proven to work and it looks less convoluted than this shit...

>>11752552
a good paycheck, usually gets me out of bed

>>11752932
i think with the president involved the a great deal more of traditional news coverage, i think the general public is more aware of it than FH. Hell i watched it with my parents, and they hadn't even realized that spacex has been landing boosters for years.

>>11753007
how the fuck do you let nasa get striked. Does this mean i can strike cnn and Colbert videos willy nilly

>>11753893
>Hell i watched it with my parents, and they hadn't even realized that spacex has been landing boosters for years.
Yeah I had the same reaction talking about it afterwards with my family.
>"I saw the way they landed the rocket, that was so cool!"
>"Yeah, they've been doing that for a while now. I wasn't worried once they cleared the tower."
>"O-oh."

>>11753447
i fear a world where china replaces Boeing for airliners

>>11753899
yes

>>11753366
thank god Artemis took design cues from the sr-71

>>11753899
Abit off topic, but some speculate that you could get some decent money out of it. Just follow a reasonably large youtube channel that monetizes it's videos, copyright claim their videos as soon as they come up, get money from the monetization because youtube is stupid, fight for the claim until you legally can't anymore, let the claim be resolved, and then you keep the money after the video has already peaked in viewership because youtube is stupid. Repeat.

>>11753906
>tfw been a space fan for years, but didn't know that SpaceX could successfully land their rockets until the first FH launch

>>11753361
I actually like it

>>11753906
i will say FH launch was a way more fun atmosphere. Lots of cheering, david bowie, everyone just sounded more excited.

>>11753366
Orange would look awful

>>11753366
Looks ugly as fuck.

>>11753871
i read somewhere that it's more efficient, it doesn't have to portion liftoff mass for propellant needed for the powered decent, [or maybe just a little if it needs power to maneuver into a gliding position]

i think it's a good marriage of the spacex approach and the SMART procedure proposed by ULA [which also uses the mid air recovery but returns only the engine]
you can use all the propellant for sending your shit to space while still recovering the stage intact

>>11753913
is that what it'll look like pressurized?
that starliner suit also looked similar to the sr71 and u2 suits when not pressurized, except for the helmet

>>11753686
>There, I just saved the space program $50 billion dollars, now we can start drawing up Moon base and Mars base designs and focus on developing the equipment we need on the ground in those places.
You are a retard. By putting people outside the Van Allen Belts and collecting data from this ways to mitigate the harmful effects and better shielding techniques can be developed.

>>11753558
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy-sVTaZRPk

>>11753141
send it to rodgin or what ever that dudes name is

Exactly how much delta/v does it take to go from Mars’ surface to a low orbif

Could we make a civilization on Venus?

Why don't we have a space station in deep space?

>>11754287
You called?

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/06/02/spac-j02.html

And while the ability to consistently recover the Falcon 9 boosters and reuse them is an advance, the rockets are still based on the crude process of setting some combination of kerosene, liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen on fire and using the resulting detonation to lift human beings many thousands of miles above the earth—just as was done in the 1960s. Their safe delivery to orbit and back is due to the collaboration of hundreds of thousands of scientists and engineers in the US and the Soviet Union who worked on this problem in the 1950s and 1960s, and their successors around the world today. Musk’s commercial enterprise is based on appropriating this work to build his private fortune.

In addition, there are still risks with the Dragon capsule itself. The history of private space flight is dotted with casualties caused by companies taking risks that have already been proven very high through the experiences of manned and unmanned space flight for the past 70 years. SpaceX itself has had three major failures involving the loss of a rocket, including one involving an explosion of a Dragon spacecraft after the launch abort system malfunctioned. The company has also had issues with its parachute system, the one that will be used to guide the ship to a soft landing when it returns to Earth.

Yep, newspace is based, it's official

>>11754365
>Never do anything
>Always take decades
>Still make mistakes
>Take no responsibility
>Waste mental capital on paper rockets
>Whine about a lack of progress

Why is the bucket of crabs mentality so entrenched in old space?

>>11754365
>More crying about rich people and innovation

Gas commies.

>>11753826
Based, that's how you make progress

>>11754232
like 5 km/s I think

>>11753699
Imagine making the sls just to launch a shitty Apollo sized capsule to the moon

>>11753699
>Can you imagine a 9 month trip to Mars in this thing

Based Retard

>>11754433
NASA has some really dumb flyby stuff planned that would involve 9 months in deep space

>>11754438
>9 month trip to Mars in this thing
>in this thing
>implying they will be packed in the capsule alone for 9 months

>>11754447
yes

>>11754448
no

>>11754451
tell me about NASA's plans, anon

>>11754452
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Space_Transport

they aren't putting people in a capsule for 9 months, idk where you got that idea from

>>11754452
There’s a dedicated habitat module intended. The Orion capsule is just the cockpit, basically.

>>11754458
Damn so many questions. Why the fuck would I want to go to Gateway FIRST if I’m going to Mars (unless gateway somehow magically becomes a refueling depot- which I can only realistically see happening with some sort of Starship) I feel like it would be in NASA’s favor to just fund starship for everything god dammit, HOW HAVE THEY MANAGED THIS LEVEL OF RETARDATION

>>11754507
It takes less delta/v to go from the moon to Mars than it takes to go from LEO to Mars

>>11754507
NASA has absolutely zero stake in Starship. They, politically, cannot give money to develop Starship as a Mars craft or super heavy lifter because:
A. it would be competition to SLS (can't have that)
B. the US Gov doesn't fund private launch vehicles except indirectly (with the lunar lander contract and money for Raptor)
At the very best, all NASA can do is wait and watch like the rest of us, while continuing their own half-baked paper plans for Mars.
>>11754513
the Gateway's NRHO is probably the highest energy orbit (with regards to going on a Mars transfer) that still exists close enough to Earth to support refueling and sending crew. If you're going to be electric slow-boating, it makes perfect sense to load your crew in NRHO.

>>11753224
In a way, I wonder if the UK has inadvertently been quite smart with its lack of expenditure over the years. US pissed away fortunes on shuttle and SLS etc, Ariane is not far away from obsolescence yet acts as a drag anchor on innovation.

>>11754523
>At the very best, all NASA can do is wait and watch like the rest of us, while continuing their own half-baked paper plans for Mars.

Anarcho-capitalist Mars

>>11754534
technoautocratic hellhole Mars

>>11754537
That sounds cool too.

>>11754537
Libertarian lesbian orgies Mars
All decisions made by rolling dice

>>11754546
Get a wife so you can watch her have sex with women

>>11754458
Should be working on something like this instead. If you want to keep people in deep space for 1.5 years, some form of artificial gravity would be very beneficial.
And you also need good radiation protection. Would be embarrassing if the first people to visit Mars die from cancer and other illnesses a few years after returning to Earth.

This might be retarded of me, but what's his end game?
He's not the one getting people excited about space, his progress is a lot slower, he's not securing NASA grants/funding, he not working with the ISS, haven't heard anything on space tourism (compared to dearMoon etc).
What's he doing, where is their big booster?

>>11753039
>in air capture
Guess how I know this was designed by german autism

>>11754577
Big Brain thinking. he's going to orbit/space in 100 years, after spacex has bankrupted in 2080.

>>11754513
>It takes less delta/v to go from the moon to Mars than it takes to go from LEO to Mars
It takes more delta V to go to the Moon from LEO and then to Mars from the Moon than it takes to go to Mars from LEO.

>some billionaire buys ULA company
>Tory starts work on venture star
A boy can dream

>>11754592
Sure, but if you refuel at the Moon and then burn for Mars, that’s more fuel in the fuel tanks.

>>11754603
How do you refuel in moon? Hydrogen/Oxygen ISRU using water?

>>11754577
He recently secured a nasa human lander contract

>>11754577
It's hardly going to hurt the US to have the world's best (Starship) and second best (BO - and possibly also third best if Falcon keeps flying) reusable launch systems, is it? You can bet plenty of work will be put BO's way.

>>11754525
I would rather spend our entire budget on space exploration, no matter the outcome, than give a single penny to HS2. Royal Space Force when?

>>11754523
>>11754507
in a way, they are funding some of it through 'lunar starship'. Not much compared to the other bids, but better than nothing at all

1. ISRU LH/LOX in moon and send to low lunar orbit.
2. Go to Mars via moon.
Tell me sfg what is wrong with this idea?
Most efficient

>>11754614
>The East India Trading Company will return and have monopoly on cargo space ships in our solar system

>>11754608
>How do you refuel in moon?

Import fuel from Earth and store it in tanks.

>>11754629
have to say, right now SpaceX is looking to be the next VOC. Funny since Elon is a south african, anglo/dutch imperialists win again

>>11754625
or just refuel CH4/LOX in LEO, go to Mars directly

>>11754640
Did you miss the part where i said " most efficient"? Starship will be great for this decade. After that we need something more efficient.

>>11754643
using the fuel to get to the moon first will never be efficient

>>11754592
the NRHO is one of the highest energy orbits that's still bound in the earth-moon system, if you're trying to yeet something it makes sense to put something there
refueling at L2 would also make sense

>>11754643
If you want to be significantly more efficient than Starship you should switch to NTR, hydrogen chem is a sidegrade that introduces more problems than solutions.

>>11754631
>Import fuel from Earth and store it in tanks.
Which requires more expense than just refueling in LEO and going directly to Mars.

>>11754651
>if you're trying to yeet something it makes sense to put something there
No, it doesn't. Getting to that high energy orbit requires a lot of input delta V which doesn't contribute to your departure velocity once it's actually time to go.

The best orbit to be on if you're going interplanetary using chemical propulsion OR nuclear thermal is low Earth orbit, because you can refill the biggest tanks you can launch in the fewest number of launches, and when you leave you get the advantage of the oberth effect.

If you're using solar electric propulsion, just kidding you aren't because it takes longer to get anywhere using SEP than it does using chemical or NTR propulsion.

>>11754556
I think the radiation protection is fairly trivial there's just been no need for us to ever worry about it. Storing water evenly around the hull in something like an inflatable bladder would provide some impressive shielding, in the emergency of solar flares there could be a cramped secondary space with greater protection where the crew can wait it out.
Another cool feature of storing the water on the outside would be micrometeorite protection.Instead of creating an airleak the exposed hole would freeze over and self seal. This also reduces the need for protective baffles like on the ISS.

For gravity it really depends on how big you make the ship, the spinning tether idea probably has the most merit over building a fuckoff big ship. You probably don't need a full 1G either which further lowers the constraints. They really are going to have to do more work understanding the biological effects of 0.3-0.7 G. I don't understand why they haven't been doing small spinning experiments with mice for a few months. Surely they're able to sustain them for a bit in orbit?

>>11754713
no, refueling in high-energy orbits makes sense if you're trying to do propulsive capture at Mars and Earth
of course, it stops making sense when you're doing aerocapture

>>11754718
>do more work understanding the biological effects of 0.3-0.7 G
That's what 75% of the scientific work on the ISS is.

We've gone from humans only being able to spend a few weeks in orbit to humans spending more than a year orbit thanks to the ISS. The real problem in low/zero G is bloodflow and bone loss, and we've worked out exercise machines and schemes to counteract the worst of these effects.

>>11754725
Should lock one of the Russians in a spinning hab with a months worth of food and some porn.
But realistically for any lengthy period of time they are going to do artificial gravity. Even with all that effort put into counteracting the effects of microgravity they turn out to be a complete mess when coming back. For something like Mars they are going to at least need 0.3G, you simply can't have astronauts getting to Mars in that condition, there's too many health risks.

Idea for a NTR/ powerplant
Would this work? Any improvements or should we start somewhere new?

>>11754754
there's two types of NTR reactor
I forget the differences but it's all been worked out
anyway, you use heat from the reactor to turn a turbopump to pump fuel into the reactor

>>11754614
I'm down with that. British Imperial Space Force now!

I've toyed with the idea of registering a company with a name along these lines for a laugh, and to trigger lefties/rebellious ex-subjects of the crown

is he okay lads?

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1267650659320500226?s=20

>>11754778
he's getting good press lately, probably doesn't want to fuck it up

>>11754784
he looked away from the Starship project for a few days to go stand around in Florida while his company was putting NASA astronauts on the ISS and it immediately blew up

>>11754784
is it cause of the black lives matter thing, a lot people hating him for not supporting it?in the comments anyway.

>>11754789
he's a capitalist and the rioters are either commies or just violent monkeys

>>11754776
based

>>11754776
Do they hunt down astronauts that have spoons without a loicense?

>>11754792
of grimes has mad him suicidal

>>11754776
hello based department.

>>11754754
You might want to work on your writing first. Dictionary is your friend when you don't know how to spell certain words.

>>11754525
Most of NASA’s budget went to stuff like New Horizons, Kepler, JWST and other probes and satellites. These are very important projects.

>>11754577

His conception of progress is still contained at too high cost and substance levels, I think. He wanted to make bold strides, but his bold stride was establishing 200k 3 minutes of weightlessness suborbital trips, and a reusable first stage that has already been usurped by SpaceX, and contributory elements to NASA's moon effort that only deliver a handful of astronauts at still exorbitant expense.

>>11754855

*limited substance

Currently writing a cover letter for SpaceX, got any tips on making sure I get their attention?

>>11754885
say you love mexican food and mariachi bands

>>11754885
Explain your intimate knowledge of Meme Magic
Elon will hire you himself

>>11754885
Roll it up into a scroll, stuff it in a model rocket and fire it over the SN5 assembly site. When the pad ninjas retrieve the communique, they will deliver it to shogun Musk for review.

>>11754778
Don't blame him, the entire "normie" internet is intolerable right now

>>11754614
RN hunting slavers in space? I like it!

>>11754958
Antarctica first, then the moon.

>Sir Richard Branson is selling more Virgin Galactic $SPCE stock — 12.5m shares (or $219 million worth at its most recent close of $17.52).

>The proceeds will go to Virgin Group businesses "that have been affected by the unprecedented impact of COVID-19."

>This is in addition to the about $500 million worth he sold last month

The Virgin Galactic vs Chad SpaceX...

>>11754965

>>11754958
Would 40K style ships with plow shaped bows work against space debris?
The plow should act as sloped armour

>>11754965
better take money from dumb investors who don't do their research and give it to impacted employees than wait for everyone to realize virgin galactic is vaporware

>>11754969
No, it makes no sense. Sloped armor a foot thick wouldn't be as effective as face-on whipple shields made of a 1 mm thick plate of aluminum suspended two feet away from the inner 1 mm thick steel hull. Much much lighter, much much more effective, because the outer layer acts to vaporize any impacting debris, and the space between the outer shield and the inner hull allows the vapor cloud to expand and bounce harmlessly off of that inner hull surface. Want more protection? Increase the distance between the outer and inner layer, and add more layers if you wish.

>>11754974
>steel armor
no use a titanium - carbon fiber composite armor desighn
>>11754969
>Would 40K style ships with plow shaped bows work against space debris?
Bows would likely be pointy and sharp

>>11753573
Looks like somebody doesnt now about MIR and how ivan squeezed every little bit out of that rustbucket.

>>11754365
>The history of private space flight is dotted with casualties
Cant think of anything outside of the virgin plane crash.
>The company has also had issues with its parachute system
It's shit like this that shows this is a shill article.

>>11754523
>NASA has absolutely zero stake in Starship
Did you miss the part where spaceX became part of the return to the moon project?

>>11755006
>Starship docking at LOP-G for refueling on way to Mars
can’t wait

>>11754994
MIR turned into vault 22 at one point and was full of fungus

>>11754969
>>11754974
>>11754992
at the point of interplanetary space travel any armor is redundant. At these speeds, the chance of a slow speed colision is going down hard so what you're looking for, are point defense turrets and early warning systems. The tank is dead and look at what a CRAM even now can do. I don't mean car sized debris, because you can dodge this, I mean tiny fragments. And even if you build a tank, how many impacts will it brush off before fatigue settles in?

>>11755009
>mission control found the fungus towel

>>11755008
>docks the LOP-G to it
>internally
The 18m one probably could give the whole station rides around the solar system.

>>11754965
my pension is with virgin how fucked am i

>>11755009
I'm now thinking of drunken cosmonauts fighing off those fungi zombies from the last of us in zeroG.

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

>>11755014
You are gonna need heat resistant armor to defend against lasers and other energy weapons.

>>11754365
>There are still risks
"There are still risks" with getting out of bed in the morning, scratching your nutsack, drinking tap water, eating food, getting in your car, taking public transportation, working, living in general.

>>11754365
>And while the ability to consistently recover the Falcon 9 boosters and reuse them is an advance, the rockets are still based on the crude process of setting some combination of kerosene, liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen on fire and using the resulting detonation to lift human beings many thousands of miles above the earth—just as was done in the 1960s.
And yet for decades while those technologies existed, none of the world's space agencies ever tried to put them together in such a way to make a cheap reusable launch vehicle. A private company had to step up to do it.

>>11754300
bruh

>Looking for jobs at an aerospace company
>Found rocket plumbing technician position
>Main Tasks: Managing and organizing pipe fittings
>At least 12 years of experience required
>More is desired

>>11755076
>Not being oversocial Chad with lots of nepostistic connections

>>11755076
nothing wrong with wanting an experience 35+ year old for rocket making

>>11755017
Unless your pension is with Virgin Galactic specifically and not another part of Virgin, it probably won't be affected in the case that they declare bankruptcy since it's a stand alone public company.
>>11754965
>Exit scammed
The odd part about VG is that they're not even trying to build an orbital rocket or space plane to compete with SpaceX and BO. Their plan after SpaceShipTwo is to build a point-to-point travel ship that compared to the Concorde will be more expensive, slower, and dangerous than it ever was. I really struggle to see the viability of their business model.

NASA spaceflight livestream of the booster getting back:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKSWxZoIbsY

Is it even possible for Virgin Galactic to build something for air launch to orbit space tourism and still be competitive against the other spaceflight companies?

They deploy from the carrier aircraft at below 15 km in attitude compared to Crew Dragon which deploys at 200km and they still have to counteract the horizontal velocity. They would of course need much more fuel and be much heavier. They would also need to ditch their feathering system so maybe it would look like huge version of Dream Chaser. Is the problem that the carrier aircraft would have to bigger than anything feasible or that the efficiency gained from air launch not worth the added complexity?

>>11755147
Why is she wearing a mask in the middle of the ocean? Are the covids really that airborne?

>>11755076
its so they can blanket deny everyone, and "have no choice" but to hire their friends and family
its standard procedure for all fields

>>11755164
Never mind, I finally decoded the ants enough to see that she's at a dock or something.

>>11755164
she's in a park, not on OCISLY

>>11755167
Sounds highly illegal.

>>11755163
No
their entire procedure is meme bullshit for retards

>>11755171
It is, but good luck proving it in court. Lawyers are expensive and people without jobs typically can't afford them.

>>11755167
or maybe they just want a master plumber

'ello

>>11755184
Why is this retard in any way relevent?

>>11755184
Please stop posting random libtwitters in a space thread.

>>11755184
Link, and context?

>>11755186
>random libtwitters
that's Scott Manley, he's space related

>>11755186
The launch is over, you can leave now.

What's the website to check the weather for launches again?

>>11755203
https://www.patrick.af.mil/About-Us/Weather/

>>11755205
thanks

>>11755147
Is this a official stream?
So much cringe.

>>11755184
?

>>11755219
No, NASASpaceflight.com is a journalistic website that's unaffiliated with NASA started by shuttle huggers after Columbia

>>11755184
based hullo, but fucking keep /pol/shit out of /sfg/

>>11754992
>>steel armor
>no use a titanium - carbon fiber composite armor desighn
You completely missed my point. First of all the hull is steel because it's cheap and easy to build with, not because it's strong. The actual armor is a single millimeter thick layer of aluminum. When you're dealing with hyper-velocity impacts, the material strength of your armor actually doesn't matter anymore. Bullets at 5 km/s pass through inches of steel as if they were inches of styrofoam. However, if you put a thin plate of rigid material between you and the projectile, when the projectile hits that plate it turns into a cloud of vapor, and in the short distance it travels between the plate and the hull it disperses enough that the hull underneath isn't hurt.

>>11755028
>heat resistant
Highly reflective and highly thermally conductive, if only 0.01% of the laser's energy is being deposited into your mirror shield and your mirror is thick enough to take a few megawatts of heat then you can rely on an active radiator in the shadow of your mirror shield and withstand laser fire indefinitely.

>>11754523
>(with the lunar lander contract and money for Raptor)
The lunar contract is giving funding for the next 6 months of development when spacex really didn't need it. Starship is really set up now.