/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11761403
Kinda like this.

>>11761415
Damn that is a precise landing. As it should be.

>>11761415
You posted the wrong one, silly

>>11761403
Magnetic latches on landing or some shit like that if it's unstable.
Really don't see the problem, landing it is the hard part, securing something that's moving slowly isn't hard.

>>11761425
it's both amazingly entertaining and horrifying how these things are made of explodium. it's like master shake throwing something at the floor

>>11761425
Nailed it

Dunno about the first landings but once you've built a proper landing site and can land with precision, the ship could be easily secured by some sort of clamp or crane or whatever

>>11761415
>wasting fuel and adding useless mass to maybe sometimes save some metal that you also have to repair

>>11761513
Not sometimes, most of the time. Also the repair costs are lower than the cost to manufacture a new rocket.

>>11761513
fuel is cheap, rocket is expensive

>>11761513
> Repair
Time to go back to plebbit for you. There are no repairs done to Falcon 9 after recovery.

>>11761403
More importantly it would destroy any unprepared surface and you have to take into account low-G forces (to make the humies survive) which the falcon 9 doesn't have to (so there is a sudden burst just before landing the F9).

I was asking myself the same but thinking more about mars and the moon.
On Earth you can have landing sites flat and with no inclination, but the first time you land on those isn't the starship's center of gravity way too high for comfort?
They even ditched the three large legs of the first designs.

>>11761513
seething

>>11761425
Why did it actually explode? Wasn't the engine turned off and thus no sparks?

>>11761837
Starship will have six landing legs. Not as elaborate as falcon's, but they are proven designs. They'll probably just find the flattest spots possible and hope for the best.

>>11761883
I think the leg extension length will be variable so Starship will always be level even on unlevel terrain

>>11761657
>>11761837
On the moon you can easily microwave the regolith to get a hard flat surface. Is actually quite easy to work with. Pic related.
Not sure about Martian soil.

>>11761870
Heat?
Pressure?

>>11761513
Fuel is pretty much free faggot

>>11761513
Landing delta-v requirements go way way way down once your rocket has delivered it's upper stage and used most of it's launch mass.

>>11761837
>>11761883
>>11761892
Why not just invest by building a flat landing area that will guarantee safe landings?

>>11761999
You must land first to build one.
And not with starship then.

>>11761837
They should just make it do belly flops and then erect it with a crane when it needs to fly again

>>11761870
pressurized fuel and oxidizer mix in a matter of a second, boom

>>11761980
your requirements stay the same
your budget increases

>>11761513
>useless mass

so you?

>>11761883
>hope for the best
And there you have it ladies and gentlemen the so called “genius” of Elow Muskrat.

is it chance that the shape of the object that takes us to space is that of a gigantic cock?

>>11762522
This was my idea senpai. Make it land on its belly.

>>11761403
you can't land if you don't take off. imo the starship/its/bfs/whatever project seems way too ambitious to be feasable with current technologies. hope I'm wrong

>>11761513
based fuck elon

>>11762872
nope, because for some reason cocks are quite aerodynamic
>>11761513
imagine being this idiot
>>11763239
fuck elon always and anyways. but "his" rockets are made by actually competent people

>>11761979
yeah but it's true that in order to bring more fuel up you need a more powerful rocket, bigger tanks and other stuff. But it's worth it and >>11761513 is still an idiot

>>11762872
SpacEX
S3XY

>>11763267
musk being an absolute manchild doesn't influence the working of a rocket. if that shape works, it works. This isn't from spacex, and yet here we are. And this is just one (the worst one) of many examples

>>11763238
What are you basing that on? To me is seems not only feasible but probable

>>11761513
These things are huge and take tons of expensive material and precision manufacturing to create.

>>11763282
Blue origin and its tiny dong are irrelevant to spaceflight

>>11761513
>losing 0% of a rocket after use is somehow worse than losing 80% of a rocket after use

>>11761513
doesnt it launch from the same place or not?
please respound, because not having to move it (even with repairs) is a big deal

>>11761837
is starship supposed to be single stage from LEO to the lunar surface and back?

>>11762553
why is there fuel left?

>>11761513

>>11763846
Because FUCK OFF with your retarded preschooler questions that you don't care about the answers to.

>>11764067
are you okay anon?

>>11764071
Nothing is okay.

>>11761892
This would be so fucking impressive to see. A balance of thrusters and offset angles of outriggers to guarantee it can't fall over.

>>11762812
Hey man, not sure if you know or not, but the guy you're quoting isn't actually Elon Musk

>>11764073
kek

>>11763843
Yes.
On Mars too, and same problems of instability without a landing pad.

>>11764110
And fucking heavy too.
I wonder if it is realistic or lighter than simply larger legs.

>>11764283
will space x do practice landings somewhere on earth with rocky terrain?

>>11761403
BIG

>>11764067
I'm not him but I actually wanted to know.

>>11764073
Look man, it does suck that we live in an increasingly anti-white society, but space is something to be happy about. We can care about white people and space at once.

>>11761403
I guess that's part of why it's chonky and has wide tail fins to rest on.

>>11764385
It doesn't rest on the tail fins.

>>11761513
it only need to reerve like 2% of the fuel to land and it returns to atmosphere at mere 6 000 km/h and at much shorter trajectory, thus thermal damage from re-entry is negligible, compared to shuttle that came down screaming at 30 000 km/h

>>11763282
Literally has a dick head lol

>>11764411
Thrusting into the future.
The future's begging for it and we're going to give it to the future.
Renholm Industries

>>11764283
i will say that i do not know much about spacex' plans. but doing some quick maths, it would need a mass ratio of about 11 to go from LEO to TLI, from TLI to LLO, from LLO to landing, back to LLO and back to Earth. this includes aerobraking around the Earth.
i cannot be fucked to do an analysis using the height of starship, the maximum tank volume and the densities of LC4 and LO2, but at a glance the mass ratio feels like it isnt reflected in these artist's renderditions.

>>11764380
If it runs out of fuel it can't land at all, so there is a safety margin.

>>11764538
Artists just do the scenery, the model of starship and its proportions are straight from spacex's website.

I wonder if it would be able to land in a loose material without falling over. I'm thinking dry sand on a beach loose. I hope they send a rover or have a satellite that can somehow investigate potential landing sites. I'd hate to find out how structurally strong a deposit of regolith is by landing a multimillion dollar space craft on it.

>>11764719
The landing itself should create a small crater.
It's going to be quite difficult anyway to predict how the landing will go.

>>11763426
Woah

I honestly didn't realise just how big they are

>>11761403
So the plan when they use this for people is to launch it into space then take the crew up bit by bit right??

Or are they just going to risk a full crewed launch?

>>11764750
>shoots people into space
Ohhh, must be simples.

>>11761513
Hello boeing

>>11761999
Checked and I really hope this becomes a goal of Artemis. Astronauts could make a square kilometer of perfectly level land. Shit, they’re sending geologists up there so they could make sure it’s structurally compact and ready to take landers

>>11765417
So in order for a starship to land it would need something to land there first.
Not really promising.

>>11761837
It's going to weigh practically nothing on the lunar surface so once it stops moving it should be fine.

>>11761403
>so fucking tall
4u

>>11763843
>>11764283
>>11764538
No, they need to refuel in a high elliptic orbit of Earth in order to get to the Lunar surface and back

>>11765547
Total weight has nothing to do with center of mass and stability, what counts is only how that weight is distributed.

>>11765853
It's a single stage meaning it remains in one piece.
Of course refueling is virtually another stage.

>>11765905
every time you refuel it counts as a stage, because it resets the deltav clock

>>11763846
>why is there fuel left?
Because if the engines sucked in gasses instead of liquid fuel, they would explode. A certain amount of every rocket's fuel is always unusable - about 1% or so.

>>11764538
The stainless steel ship is expected to mass in somewhere between 100 and 150 metric tons, with 1200 metric tons of fuel.

>>11761403
Tethers from the cone that shoot out into the ground in 3 directions with a variable winch system hooked up to a calibrating computer which we already have...

>>11766021
>1.5 kilotons
It is one third a Hiroshima.

>>11766732
1/10th.

>>11766021
and this will be launched in two stages, one of which is the Starship itself to complete orbital insertion (thus shifting the mass ratio even further)?

Really good software

>>11765897
this

the weight of the engines, leftover fuel, and aft cargo should help lower the CoM

>>11761417
>As it should be.
Rigjht. It can either be done or it cannot.
If it can, follow that route, no reason to be slow.

>>11764667
>uncrewed
What will this version be for?

>>11767081
>What will this version be for?
Launching satellites and other payloads into orbit.

>>11761403
i want that inside me.

>>11761513
an this anon, is how niggers think

>>11763282
Blue Origin is gay and cringe

>>11761910
that will just create a thin crust a rocket will crush to dust from exhausts before it even lands

>>11761513
This has to be bait

>>11764073
The two Americas

>>11767959
And you belong to neither of them.

>>11764750
BFR is going to be awe-inspriring

>>11767081
>>11767262
Not just launching shit into orbit but providing absolutely essential cargo to the moon and mars on a routine basis. Or cargo anywhere. It's a one stop shop freighter and colony ship

>>11761513
hi Vlad

>>11764041
r/enoughmuskspam in a nutshell

>>11771017
>Nooo don't mess with the muskerino

>>11764073
whites making it great, niggers looting

You know how light from the sun can be amplified by a concave reflected surface. What are the chances that this thing sets something on fire by reflecting sunlight. Kinda like the London Skyscraper.

>>11771017
>r/enoughmuskspam
you absolutely need to go back.

>>11771222
Come on, it's not just the nigs looting, plenty of self hating whites are doing it too.

>>11761461
this would be totally unnecessary in space because no wind, and it’s not like they will land on surfaces that aren’t almost perfectly flat in the first place

>>11764073
This is brilliant

>>11761403
I love how much SpaceX and Musk make trannies, pseuds and communists on reddit seethe.

>>11771267
>like that London Skyscraper
What

>>11772782
>dude lets build a skyscraper shaped as a giant parabolic mirror, what could go wrong
>yes, so unique, so post-modern
>take that, classic, pleasing, architecture around it
>oh no
https://www.nbcnews.com/sciencemain/london-skyscraper-can-melt-cars-set-buildings-fire-8C11069092

>>11763494
>repairing a rocket is better than replacing a rocket

>>11761513
space x niggers are a fucking cult.
They genuinely believe questioning musk is like questioning known science itself.

>>11772602
>you can't start a company and launch rockets into space!!!
>it's racism!
>China do it better!!!
>elon is a racist white male!!!
>reeeee stop launching rockets!!!!!

It was an interesting thread before pol arrived.
Time to abandon ship.

I can't pay no doctor bill
But Whitey's on the moon

>>11773644
t. Pedoguy

>>11773644

>>11773644
No these people hate China, they just avoid saying it because they would get cancelled if they did
I hope China does it better, they'll be able to mass produce rockets with their zerg spam tactics

>>11773784
Apparently still having legality issues with child abduction laws

>>11773796
Needs a "haha rocket goes *brrrrrr*" boomer meme

>>11767959
>>11764073
the duality of man

>>11773796
Except green would be mad that that tickets cost $250000 a head.

>>11773796
wtf? libleft nerds love space. If anything libright would hate spacex for getting nasabux

>>11772602
Reddit loves spaceX but hates Musk for some reason

>>11774330
This one is very out of touch. NASA has explicitly said they're fine with SpaceX's approach of "blow shit up on the test pad." It's just R&D, safety protocols come later down the development line.

>>11762812
that's basically what we did for apollo.

>>11774810
noooo you can't just criticize my meme!!!

All space faggots are neo nazis who want to waste fuel and metals on shooting stuff into the sky.

>>11776420
were you planning on doing something useful with that fuel and iron?
we've got plenty of extra if you need some

>>11776420
wtf i love space now

>>11761415
Lmao this so fake i literally loled

There ya go anons

>>11776420
So what you're saying is, the best future involves becoming fascists? You're glowing, Anon.

where did we go wrong

>>11776530
mouse?

Tethers

>>11776629
ice

>>11776530
Imagine
>having so little to do that you spend your time trying to "debunk" a free livestream where you imagine you see something
also imagine
>being so retarded that you film your computer screen with your phone then upload it back to your computer instead of just using screen capture software

>>11776530
what is this meant to show?

>>11776952
It shows the tethers of that are holding it horizontally in the Hollywood movie studio.

>>11776530
It blows my fucking mind that people unironically thought this was a mouse
these rockets go 24000 miles a fucking hour, you think a fucking mouse would be able to just hang on to that? And also the """mouse""" would be on metal thats hundreds or thousands of degrees hot. Why are conspiracytards so fucking stupid?

2020 and steel is still the best material? What happened to all the magic carbon materials?

>>11777625
>2020 and steel is still the best material? What happened to all the magic carbon materials?

Carbon is expensive to manufacture, is difficult to scale up (SpaceX isn't kidding when they say they want to launch thousands of Starships), and it has worse performance than stainless steels for its weight in the most demanding load regimes of Starship's flight operations.

>>11777244
>metal thats hundreds or thousands of degrees hot
So it's not ice either

>>11777707
You can clearly see it falls from the aluminium foil part onto the engine muzzle, then falls away after 2 seconds.

>>11761403
Lights, Camera, Action!

>>11761403
really looks like shit at this stage

>>11777778
pretty neat huh

>>11777801
I think SN6 or whenever they add the full nosecone and fins is when it will start coming together, their welds and ring stacking has improved a lot since they started

>>11777707
leidenfrost, it's boiling away and jumping around on that hot griddle

>>11761513
>trying to save some useless nasal by refueling your sports car instead of throwing it out after using up the first track of gas
ishygddtdgty

>>11774429
Everyone outside SpaceX/Tesla sub hates Musk/Tesla/SpaceX. The hate is dumb too. "You can't insult someone on twitter" "You can't open up your business"

>>11764750
>I honestly didn't realise just how big they are
have you never seen one launch?

>>11778534
there's nothing for scale
you don't realize how big they are until you see one up close in person or a picture with men and vehicles for scale

>>11778568
>there's nothing for scale
except for the dragon capsule and all the buildings and vehicles around the launchpad you fucking retard

>>11770929

You'll see the Chinese and Russians scrambling to catch up with their own reusable rocket, though I think they'll commit to building their own lunar base with the Angara and Long March

>>11761425
>Even your failures are awesome

That's how you know you're doing the right thing.

>>11765522
>Our galleon is worthless as we must use a dinghy to get to shore.

>>11777625

You realize there's a lot more to steel than just Iron with a low carbon content?

Steel alloys have continued to improve, perhaps more than any other material, just due to how widespread it is.

>>11778631
The French already are
Ariane 6 is getting reworked completely
CNES few days announced the will step up work on Prometheus engine for it
>Methane+LOx insted of LH2
>3D printed engine, should cost 10 times less than Vulcain
>reusable, throttleable, re-lightable
>hull should be 2 times cheaper, weld-less, flow formed (and thus won't blow up)
that combination could easily compete with Falcon, if it won't take them another decade before cranking them out

>>11778799
I think the real sweetspot isn't trying to compete with Starship, it's trying to compete with Falcon 9 but with full (upper stage) reuse
something like New Glenn but all propane/LOx instead of methane and hydrogen

>>11778593
show me on the doll where anon touched you

>>11778804
the thing that worries me about Starship are the welds
Arianespace's approach to cost cutting in manufacturing seems much more reasonable to me
novel manufacturing technology > just wing it bro

>>11763846
You want a reserve in case of delays or emergencies. Would you really want to time a rocket to land exactly as the fuel runs out?

>>11778593
Shut up faggot

>>11761513
>>11764750
Is... Is this bait?

>>11778804
Falcon 9 ditched upper stage reuse because the vehicle is too small to launch anything useful once you try to put recovery hardware onboard.

>>11780244
yes
duplicate or beat Falcon 9's LEO performance but with a vehicle the size of New Glenn while doing full reuse

>>11778851
>novel manufacturing technology > just wing it bro
Welding pressure containing steel vessels is a mature technology that's done daily, why the fuck would you stray from that if you could avoid it?

>>11761513
brainlet

>>11777778
>it glitched out it must be a conspiracy!
you think nobody would see the rocket be hoisted onto the barge?

>lands on mars.

>dust devil runs into it.

>tips over

Great idea Elon.

>>11780444
No. Martian atmosphere is so thin that windspeed is pretty much irrelevant. It takes hurricane force winds to lift up super fine dust.

>>11762473

Falcon Heavy can send the landing pad construction drones to the moon without issue, wouldn't take more than a handful of launches.

>>11777778
I can only imagine the cutout when something the size and power of the Saturn V tries a barge landing.

>>11778799
>>11780244

I thought that the Ariane changes are just going to recover the engine and avionics, and leave the whole rest of the first stage to burn up?

I was also mistaken, according to wikipedia the Russians will be trying to build a fully reusable energia, in lieu of the Angaras.

>>11761425
fucking lmao

>>11781689
the fully reusable Energia was a Soviet project, not a Russian one
the Russians can't build Energia anymore because crucial parts were made in the Ukraine

>>11764750
My dad lives in brownsville and last time I visited was when they were going to do the first hop. I got a chance to drive out to boca chica and check it out. Its pretty neat to see up close.

>>11764750
that's what she said

>>11761870
Doesnt need a spark smooth brain, parts of the engine are still red hot!

>>11781689
no
ESA is literally copying SpaceX's homework

>>11782985
and thats good.

test