/sci/ - Science & Math

Good edition. If we were visitors from a different solar system, Earth would be the strangest. Also first for fuck Boeing

ARE YA READY KIDS?
OH
who lives in a buttplug up out on the surface
>SFG PROONT FAG
annoying and persistent and irradiated is he
>SFG PROONT FAG
if space flight discussion is something you wish
>SFG PROONT FAG
then run away fast and give this thread a miss

>>11834774
Based

Hyped for that Starlink launch tomorrow? Ready for another step towards the completion of one of the most disruptive projects in human history?

>>11834778
reminds me to sign up for beta testing if it comes to yurp. cheers anon. fuck cables and fuck boeing.

>>11834778
please Elon let me give you my money for a connection to Starlink, I can't deal with my local monopoly anymore.

>>11834778
>tfw Australian

Elon please hurry and apply the zyklon b to the Telstra gigakikes

>dude just dig a hole and put some pipe in there
you homos never dug a hole
you can't dig out a hole for a hab with a shovel in an eve suit
you would need an excavator and you might as well put a proonter head on the thing
welding steel tubes on moon is dumb

dunno if any of you guys are looking for jobs but apparently starlink are hiring.

worthy of a repost
>following the Agency’s April 30 decision, leaders of the Committee reiterated their concerns and expressed disappointment in NASA’s deviation from Congressional intent with bill H.R. 5666
>congress had directed NASA to place more focus on sending humans to Mars than on returning to the Moon, to delay sending a crewed mission to the Moon until 2028, and to have full ownership of the lunar lander, instead of buying those services from a private company amd deemphasized many of the scientific plans related to lunar missions that are seen as vital to NASA, including making use of lunar ice at the Moon, and it sought to restrict the development of a “continuously crewed lunar outpost or research station”
>the CLPS initiative has the legislators’ approval, but they also direct NASA to use lunar landers that operate using the Space Launch System
>curiously significant because all three cosponsors of H.R. 5666 receive thousands of dollars in campaign funding from a Boeing-associated PAC each campaign cycle
>Upon closer look, it is not the fact that NASA is partnering with private companies that seems to bother original cosponsors of this bill; instead, the opposition stems from the way in which NASA is doing it and who the Agency is doing it with.

>>11834790
>“Just attach a printer head lmao!”
Do you realize how much fucking harder it is to add a printer head? Especially compared to an excavater? And welding would be easy, ESPECIALLY on the Moon. You can just vacuum weld everything

>>11834799
absolutely disgusting

Neither here nor there, but this is a nice little house song I like to listen to once in a while when thinking about planets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNLRWZTl3iY

How is fair Dragon-2 faring? Does New Horizons have an even more insignificant future target? What exactly is the next gen Soyuz/Russian solution? Also I know nothing about about PrivateSpace outside Virgin right now so someone tell me things about those.

>>11834799
>let‘s make things slower and more expensive and let‘s hire the guys who keep fucking up recently and also recently just meddled with a procurement process

>>11834829
Oh, I forgot.
>let‘s move all our future projects onto an unproven system before it even has a single flight

>>11834801
>You can just vacuum weld everything
Please be retarded somewhere else

>>11834799
Lobbying should be treated like treason.

>>11834849
Electron beam welding is the best welding method ever invented and it only works under high vacuum, which is free on the Moon and easy to pull on Mars.

Musky boy is at it again with the late night Twitter pics of starship hardware

>>11834866

>>11834801
>Do you realize how much fucking harder it is to add a printer head?
I don't, really
you have excavator arm and you have printer arm - 2 arms on one "rover"
>You can just vacuum weld everything
vacuum welding isn't as easy as you think
you can't just fold some sheet metal and expect it to fuse
you would need some kind of industrial press and be 100% sure there's not even microscopic speck of dirt anywhere (on Moon, which is a giant lump of ultra-fine dust)

Has any anon ITT been to the Cosmosphere in Hutchinson? How does it compare to the other space museums?

>>11834862
People aren't talking about electron beam welding when they say vacuum welding, though. They mean cold welding of clean metal surfaces in vacuum.

>>11834849
welding in Mar's atmosphere won't be an issue
the atmospheric compressors/reclamators will produce an absurd quantity of argon as a byproduct
store that and suddenly welding is basically the same as it is on earth

>>11834870
>>11834866
this is suddenly the "mid bay" instead of the "high bay"
Elon please

>>11834870
These ones look a lot less janky than the first couple of iterations.

>>11834764

We’re lucky to live in a time in which the roads to the stars are currently being built before our eyes.

Historians will talk about this time period in the future.

>>11834935
>starship underperforms and only launches 10 per year at most
This is my biggest fear bros

>>11834935
if only there were ways to get more involved in it all.

>>11834942
>10 per year at most
10 launches of a super heavy lift vehicle per year would be fucking amazing. Not necessarily the magical space future Elon keeps selling, but a major step in that direction.

>>11834780
And fuck unitymedia/Vodafone
I hate them

>>11834953
>>11834942
>I'M, I'M, I'M GOING TO DOOOOOOOOOOM

>>11834942
I did some math because I’m retarded and I found that making a viable colony on mars actually requires very few launches of Starship.

Let’s say you need 1000 people on mars to make a viable population. Some say the number is closed to 10,000, others say it’s as low as 100 people. 1,000 people is a good middle ground as it is not a super large number, but is large enough to factor in for potential losses of life. Remember, all 7 billion humans today are derived from only a few thousand individuals. 1,000 people on mars should definitely be enough to “restart” humanity in the event of some disaster. If that population is too small, then a few thousand frozen embryos could be carried along to increase genetic diversity. They’re light and don’t need much maintenance.

NASA estimates that a person eats 2.5 lg of food a day, or 0.9125 metric tons of food a year. Let’s round this up to 1 ton of food a year.

It is also stated that a person consumes several tons of air and water per year as well. However, using simple ISRU technology, we can negate the need to carry tons of water/air with us to mars. The ground near the poles is full of water-ice, and the air has large amounts of Oxygen (in the form of carbon monoxide, but it can easily be split into breathable oxygen).

So at this point all we have to worry about is hauling one metric ton of food per person every year. We’re being pessimistic here, and this also allows for us to account for other cargo necessities like space suits and tools. So for our hypothetical colony of 1,000, we’d need 1,000 tons of cargo every year. Is that a big number? Yeah it is, but luckily Starship is huge.

Even if Starship can only place 100 tons into LEO (versus the planned 150 tons today), it would require a total of ten fully-loaded starships per year to support a mars colony of 1000. As mars launch windows occur every other year, we’d need twenty of these cargo ships departing

1/2

>>11834994
>I'M DOOOOOMING

>>11834942
>>11834994

So anyways back to the point.

Technically you’d need ten starships per year to give your colony enough food to survive. Keep in mind this is assuming that they produce literally zero food on their own, which is pretty unlikely.

It takes 3.8 Kilometers a second (3800 m/s) of delta V to transfer to mars. As starship uses Aerocapture to enter mars orbit, the only other need for Delta-V comes with mars landing. Elon believes that starship will land while traveling at sub-Mach 1 speeds (below 343 m/s). Let’s be pessimistic and assume that starship needs around three times that amount to land (1000 m/s).

In total, starship would require 4,800 m/s of delta v to get it’s 100 ton payload onto the Martian surface. Assuming that starships Dry Mass is 150 metric tons (which is heavier than currently planned, but we’re being pessimistic here), and assuming that Raptor Vacuum has an ISP of 375 seconds (which is below its planned configuration), our starship would need 700 extra tons of propellant, assuming that the original Cargo Starship reaches orbit with tanks empty.

So you have the original Cargo starship, with its mass of 150 tons and 100 tons of payload (total mass 250 tons) being refueled with 700 tons of fuel. In our pessimistic scenario, starship can place only 100 tons into LEO, so this means that we need seven tanker launches for every one cargo launch for the mars voyage.

Alright so in total, it takes eight launches to get 100 tons of cargo to the Martian surface. As we need 1000 tons of cargo per year to support our 1000-person-colony, this translates to ten flights of our cargo ship per year, leading to a total of eighty starship launches a year including the seven-per tanker launches. This means that over the 26 month period between mars launch windows, 160 Launches of starship must take place. Assuming each month is exactly thirty days, this gives us 780 days to dish out 160 launches.

2/3

>>11834994
>>11835005

So this means we need one starship launch ever 4.875 days, or around one every five days.

So eighty launches of Starship a year to support a Mars colony of 1000? And this is a very pessimistic scenario too!

All I’m trying to show is that even if Starship is shittier than intended, it can still do beautiful things. Maybe it won’t be the vehicle that puts millions of men on mars, but it can be enough to at least safeguard the human race.

As a side note, assuming that Starship can put 150 tons into LEO (which is the current plan, and is 50% heavier than the “pessimistic starship), the numbers get even better.

1000 tons of cargo per year suddenly becomes just 7 trips of a Cargo Starship carrying 150 tons of Cargo. Updating the engine ISP to 383 seconds - which is the current plan - means that to put 150 tons on the Martian Surface, you’d need 750 tons of fuel, which equates to 5 launches of a tanker in this scenario.

As such, the 7 required trips Per year would need six launches each, with one being the Cargo Ship and the other five being tankers. This equates to just 42 Starship launches per year, which is incredibly doable! This is even assuming that Starship still weighs 150 tons, as opposed to the planned 120 tons.

SUMMARY:

A very very conservative starship can support a self-sustaining human colony with about 80 launches per year, assuming that Starship is not only heavier than planned, but has lower ISP engines, and can lift only 100 tons to LEO.

However, is Starship attains the planned payload to LEO and the engine ISP goal of 383 seconds, even with it being heavier than planned, it would only take 42 launches per year to support a self-sustaining or at least “human survival backup” colony.

So either way, we’re gonna make it.

3/3

>>11834994
>>11835005
>>11835023
based and undooooomed

>>11835028
Thanks man

>>11834942
>>11834994
>>11835005
>>11835023

A final scenario that popped up.

What if Starship really underdelivers? Like really really badly. Let’s say it can only put fifty tons into LEO. Yeah I know right. But hey let’s do the math.

In this scenario, Starship is still overweight (150 tons vs the planned 120 tons), and has underperforming engines (375 sec vs 383 sec isp). So this vehicle is ultra-ultra-conservative.

1000 tons of cargo a year, with shipments of 50 tons, would require a total of twenty UC (ultra conservative) Starship flights a year.

At a mass of 150 tons, with 50 tons of payload, UC-Starship has a dry mass of 200 tons. With its engines burning at 375 sec ISP, and with a planned delta V of 4800 m/s (which is incredibly conservative by the way), our UC-Starship would need 550 tons of methalox fuel per mission.

550 tons of fuel over a series of 50-ton launches means that for ever one cargo flight to mars, UC-Starship needs 11 tankers. For a full flight of 50 tons of cargo to mars, 12 launches are needed.

As 1000 tons of payload are needed each year, that means a total of 20 cargo departures, each with 12 Flights each, are needed. This equates to a total of 240 flights of UC-Starship a year!

However, 240 flights a year, although hard, is not impossible. It translates to around one launch every 36 hours. SpaceX has two launch pads on the East coast. Assuming the rockets take off from 39A, then 36 hours later, a second takes off from SLC-40, you need a las turnaround time of 72 hours. That’s...very doable.

So in summary, even if Starship can only put 50 tons into LEO (which is less than the Falcon heavy), is fat (150 tons versus the planned 120 tons), and has shittier engines (375 sec isp vs 383 planned)...

IT CAN STILL SUPPORT A VIABLE HUMAN POPULATION ON ANOTHER WORLD!

>>11834878
No they're not. Or at least I'm not and I'm not the anon you responded to.

The problem with electron beam welding is the x rays, it's still going to be for robots. Every normal welding technique will be easier anyway.

>>11835044
Based rain man making me BELIEEEEEIVE in Elon

>>11834774
Its like you guys want me here now

>>11835076
you've become an sfg meme. part of the furniture.

>>11835080
Let it ride then

>>11835044
This ignores the real question of whether Starship/Superheavy can actually hit its reusability targets. Whether you can completely reuse one rapidly 50 times, or if the hull needs checkups after 10 or maybe the engines are toast after 3 flights has a big impact on these calculations. Whether you lose a booster on 1 in 100 flights or 1 in 5 makes a difference. Same again with the Starship. If the engines, the hull or the heatshield can‘t be made reliable enough on multiple uses, then it throws a wrench in some of these plans, especially when you‘re talking about launch cadences of 72 hours or lower. I know Starship will probably be cheap and easy to build comparatively, but you‘re not going to be supplying that kind of demand by building all of them from scratch.

>>11835084
I have faith in the heatshields. Already we are seeing an intrinsic difference from the shuttle. They are a different material that won’t be a hassle to maintain, and the fact that all the segments are the same piece makes it very modular and easy to swap new ones one (whereas the shuttle had hundreds of specialized shapes and sizes so refurbishment was a nightmare). In addition to this, the hull is stainless steel, instead of the shuttle’s inferior aluminum, so starship can already take quite a punch from atmospheric reentry.
The real kicker, in my opinion, comes from the engines. Getting an engine that can fly 1000 times with minimalistic inspections like an airplane engine is fucking insane. I don’t doubt Elon’s abilities, but this is where the largest money sink might be. If Raptor engines end up being a malnourished mess Elon might have to start pumping raptors out like crazy and swap them everytime SS returns to Earth

new glenn will use jeffs shiny head as a heatshield

>>11835084
They're only expecting the heatshield to degrade significantly on Mars return afaik, and they've definitely run all the numbers and done all the tests. I have similar faith in their ability to get the hull where they want it - as anti-doomer anon pointed out above, they can even sacrifice payload (for robustness, ie) and still come out on top.

>>11835097
>Getting an engine that can fly 1000 times with minimalistic inspections like an airplane engine is fucking insane.
That's like another blue sky project, to me. It's not necessary to fulfill any of the standards SS needs to hit except in the specific case of mass E2E

>>11835123
This leads me to the question, how the fuck has no one come up with a better idea than SS before, and why the FUCK is no one trying to compete?! I guess SLS was already planned way before Elon was even on the radar, but why would a company like ULA continue working on Vulcan when the writing is on the wall- Elon is about to btfo of everyone

>>11835133
SpaceX R&D investment, vertical integration and previous technological knowledge in reusable rockets. SpaceX isn't developing SS from scratch.

Oh, and we don't have many crazy genius autists that make multiplanetary humanity their life goal.

>>11835133
Outside of SpaceX, some smallsat launchers, and poo rockets, the mindset of prioritizing driving down launch costs just doesn't really exist. The industry is built on accruing massive costs and getting proportional payment back on subsidies and inflated contracts. That's a good way to keep a fledgling afloat while they build the infrastructure (see SpaceX) but if you don't ween them, well, you see what happens.

The other thing is SpaceX is just getting really good at this shit faster than anyone can keep up with. The industry's idea of competition comes with a minimum of a decade lag time, as we've seen with Falcon. SpaceX has moved on and everyone else is still trying to catch up to that. Now they're churning out methalox FFSC engines at single digit mill apiece and it's not even their final form, it's a strict technological advantage.

...LVNA ...HOME

>>11835186
You separatist scum are going into the airlock, naked. No need to waste a bullet on you.

I'm a big dumb dumb. Why is there leftover energy when Photons are absorbed by a light sail?

Sample numbers: 1 Watt of light intensity, sail mass of 1kg. 1 second runtime. This gives you overall energy contained in the photons of 1 Joule. They exert 1 Watt/c of force on the light sail. In one second it is accelerated to a speed of 1s x 1W/c*kg and now has kinetic energy 0.5 x 1kg x (1s x 1W/c*kg)^2 = 5.5 x e-18 Joule. Where the hell did the other 99.9999999999999% of energy go? And why do photons have such low momentum/why are they so bad at tarnsferring their energy into momentum? The energy would be conserved if they had p = E/(0.5m/s) instead of p = E/c.

Why aren't you playing KSP full autism edition: sounding rocket simulator right now?

t. currently flying some V2 equivalent ethalox big boys and trying to build some smaller aerobee/nike rockets that don't tear themselves apart on launch and can be built faster than the three months it takes for my big boys

>>11835251
what mods?

>>11835251
we'd like to know more.

>>11835215
>what is reflection

>>11835215
related dumbass question. if photons have mass and can be used for propulsion why can't you just hang a bid ol' laser out the back of you ship and turn it on? why bother with the sails n sheeeit.

>>11835133
If you don't have an efficient cost/production structure, the vehicle you make really won't matter.

>>11835133
ss still isn't orion, and that idea is decades old.

>>11835289
That's why I said they're absorbed

>>11835302

>>11835286
>>11835264
RO/RP1 and related mods on 10.625x GPP instead of real solar system, plus a bunch of other misc shit, still working on cleaning up my modlist and trying to minimize the jankiness but aside from some recurring crashes related to going back to the VAB after a simulation flight it's working pretty well

I also intend to install KSPIE later on for all the meme future shit it adds and possibly make some configs to add the parts into the RP1 tech tree properly, but I have it unloaded for now to speed up load times since I'm still in 1950s tech right now


pic has most of it, the whole thing is still a work in progress and there's a couple things I don't have installed through CKAN like GPP and rescale, but if I get everything working smoothly I might see about setting it up as a modpack with CKAN

t. autismo supreme

>>11835314
i have no idea what 99% of that means but it sounds cool. also my laptop is like 8 years old and barely runs firefox so...

>>11834877
>Hutchinson
Where the fuck even is that? Canada?

>>11834935
>tfw a good friend of mine who liked old SF stories passed away at the beginning of Dec 2018 and never got to see these ass-first rockets being built

Is she right, /sfg/?

>>11835429
Colonization of the red planet requires it.

>>11835429
Not for a while. It will be more akin to a military or scientific expedition.

>>11835429
Yes? Multiplanetary species don't happens without reproduction.

>>11835429
we can use one starship to unfurl a 150 ton, 100km rolled banner in martian orbit:
NO GIRLS ALLOWED

>>11835429
only tomboys allowed
no makeup on mars

>>11835475
it hurts bros.......

>>11835481
/sfg/ space feelies general.
ONLY space feelies, thanks.

>>11835496
Spaceflight being a commonplace, everyday thing for the general public will probably not happen in our lifetimes.

>>11835504
why?

Anyone else depressed over the fact that manned spaceflight is going nowhere for the foreseeable future? Looks like the upcoming election is either going to end up with artemis cancelled before happening or 2024 will end up with artemis (and with it all commercial partnerships) cancelled after one or two brief missions. The political winds will continue to toss spaceflight back and forth forever with nobody following through on decades of commitments

>>11835535
>he still relies on nasa for human space flight
brah

>>11835535
Fuck off Lefty demoralizor. If Nasa won’t do it. SpaceX will. Trump did us all a great thing with his service to spaceflight but we don’t necessarily need him anymore.

A Biden presidency would be a big setback, yes. Snuff out this new golden age? Fuck no.

>>11835535
>muh NASA
End it. There is exactly one thing NASA has gotten right in the last 50 years and that's commercial cooperation, congress (ft. Boing) is ready to end this no matter what happens next election. We got SpaceX out of the deal, now it's time to move on. NASA is dead. Starship is happening.

>>11835535
>Anyone else depressed over the fact that manned spaceflight is going nowhere for the foreseeable future?
nah because that's wrong, get with the times grandpa

>Looks like the upcoming election is either going to end up with artemis cancelled before happening or 2024 will end up with artemis (and with it all commercial partnerships) cancelled after one or two brief missions.
spacex can handle itself just fine without artemis

>The political winds will continue to toss spaceflight back and forth forever with nobody following through on decades of commitments
hence why spacex is in the lead and nasa is falling behind

spaceflight has never been this alive since the apollo era dude
get out of your fucking cave

>>11835475
>posting the borderline gay kind of tomboy
>not posting the best kind of tomboy
Jesus anon

>>11835543
>>11835547
>>11835556
>all these elon fanboys
sorry to tell you guys, but a private company isn't colonizing mars all on its own. spacex can't launch anything without government approval and a for-profit company has no incentive to throw money at mars for no reason

>>11835429
Until artificial womb becomes the norm, yes.

>>11835543
as long as no accident/major setback happen with the current space projects, Biden and the people behind him won't try to stop them
the momentum is simply too great

not like trump is an universal advocator for space anyway, he keeps trying to defund some NASA telescopes to funnel money to his pet project artemis

>>11835567
Elonmemes get the rope here, just warning.

he has nothing to back up his trolling just ignore it

Reminder that this is SpaceX's opposition.

>>11835567
the state of your opinions

>>11835572
Also worth considering that the space coast is in the swing state of Florida.

>>11835567
ok kid
give me your number so i can call you and laugh when SpaceX lands starship on mars

>>11835535
Starlink can talk all they want about rural and third worlder internet but the real earner there is America’s drone fleet the new tip of the spear that demands global satellite coverage.

If NASA stops funding SpaceX, the CIA and DoD will continue to do so. Thats beside the obvcious starlink profit.

Fuck Biden and any attempt to trap us all on the planet Africa.

>>11834994
>>11835005
>>11835023
Not as relevant short-term, but long-term you'd want to ship clothing and medicine too. While eventually they'll be producing everything they need on site, for the first few decades time and effort spent on retarded shit like fixing clothing or stitching together something usable from scraps would be horrendously inefficient (and thus expensive).

>>11835535
Assuming you meant American manned space flight. As others have pointed out, SpaceX is not tied to political winds, and definitely has the capability to send people to LEO and beyond. Even if Starship doesn't pan out as a manned vehicle, they still have Dragon 2 which is the cheapest human ride to space right now.

There's also Blue Origin which has their own plans for manned space flight, but they're keeping their plans mostly hidden for now.

>>11835567
>spacex can't launch anything without government approval
Which they have the approval.

>a for-profit company has no incentive to throw money at mars for no reason
A fair point, but SpaceX isn't throwing money at Mars for no reason. They're betting on a "if you build it, they will come" philosophy on jump starting a space economy. They're building the infrastructure to send significant material to Mars (and anywhere in the Solar system) for cheap, and that won't go unnoticed. Someone will eventually pay to have their own equipment sent to Mars which gives SpaceX profits.

>spaceX starts colonizing mars
>due to the harsh environment, only toughed out people who actually work come (engineers, military families, astronauts, relevant scientists, etc)
>population has almost no minorities beyond east asians and westernized pajeets because of this
>earth gov't soon sees this
>they can't really do shit to the colonists since they already live pretty fucking deep underground and the nuclear radiation is practically nothing compared to the kind the colonist CHADS and stacies deal with daily
>IFLSfags end up protesting because "muh preservation and looks"
>BLM outright hates mars colonization because only whypipo on mars
>suddenly all the annoying ass faggots of the world turn against each other
>jewish control starts imploding
>faggots outright kill themselves
>earth is too busy destroying itself to do anything real
>massive depression begins on earth
>mars on the other hand is booming
>martians end up like superhumans thanks to the distraction of pornography and the urge to consoom pointless product being practically nonexistent there
>mars colony proceeds to launch an attack on earth to take it back
>massive orbital fight begins
>elon, now a full-blown superman analogue, jumps out of his personal combat dragon capsule
>jacob rothschild comes out of his child
>jacob is a fucking mutant that became so from absorbing his family and the rest of the jewish elite thanks to the depression

>>11835601
Whether or not there is a profit motive in colonization itself doesn't really matter. Elon started SpaceX with settling Mars as the driving decision behind everything. As long as SpaceX can stay solvent through other means (which it can do through Starlink alone if necessary) while building out the infrastructure, that's all that matters.

>>11835623
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_SxVtf6Nk0 plays
>massive DBZ esque "fight" begins
>all kinds of physical laws are being broken here
>jacob is on the defensive due to elon's method of power being hard work, while he used parasitism on even his own kin
>many swings and kicks are exchanged, many hit each other
>jacob even directs his militaries toward elon, but they're too slow for him
>elon musk decides enough is enough
>pulls back his arm
>calls upon the energy of the butthurt generated by jeff bezos from the falcon's success
>charges forward, with little energy left
>"FALCON PUUUUUUUUUUUUNCH"
>the image of a block 5 falcon 9 booster appears over his arm
>plows straight through the last remaining jew elite
>he explodes, freeing the earth from long-nosed tyranny
>elon, having run out of energy, dies peacefully knowing he saved humanity
>a republic is formed by elon's many sons on the wrecked earth
>the rebirth of earth sends humanity into a new age of true progress
>humanity's great filter has been passed

>>11835623
>>11835638
schizo containment board this way
>>>/x/

>>11835623
/pol/ overestimates how many people (of any colour) give a shit about the boring vapid identity politics that has gripped a tiny but loud segment of the media for the last 10 years.

>>11835567
>a for-profit company
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it‘s not a for-profit company. It‘s owned by Musk.
Not sure what kind of obligations he might have towards private investors.

>>11835638
>>calls upon the energy of the butthurt generated by jeff bezos from the falcon's success
Kek

>>11835642
i was just making up a fun narrative you fucking plebbitor.

>>11835662
Ignore the haters anon, I enjoyed it

>>11835642
Retard.

>>11835623
>Anons build their own starship and fly to Mars
>Stick the landing... literally. Starship is now a tower
>Decide to build a base by expanding from starship tower
>Soon disagreements make way to divergent bands
>/pol/ wants to make the base into new Reichstag
>/k/ builds armory temple with Murder/k/ube at its heart, the Basili/k/a
>/sci/ build technocratic state from the city of Bad Landing as the base is now known
>/mlp/ plagues Utopia Planitia, riding robot horses and raiding as autistic Martian Comanche
>Reddit and normalfags are losing their minds as raycis altright nazis are on Mars too

Who here /simplerockets2/?

>muh KSP

Bitch please. SR2's designer is infinetely more flexible and as such you can build shit that looks like actual rockets.

>>11835654
it's a for profit plc as far as i can tell. meaning that as long as musk follows the general diligence all companies must follow, and obliges any investments made, yes he do what the fuck he likes if he is the sole shareholder.

Do launch vehicles have a delta/v margin of error, or is it by the skin of their teeth?

fuck my ass for posting caps in the wrong order

:/

Oh no I forgot the heat shield.

>>11835680
>you can build shit that looks like actual rockets.
post some then

>>11835681
While SpaceX is a for-profit company, it's also the case that Musk can practically ignore profit motive as long as it's within the company's mission. SpaceX's private investors are not going to throw a fit over short term capex. This is the reason SpaceX is private and the reason Musk wanted to take Tesla private

>>11835726
SpaceX is a private, not a public company. He owns it in the same way I own my gym shorts.

>>11835737
he has investors who he has to answer to, though

>>11835726
investors in a private company work differently to how they would buying shares in a public one. the company has contractual obligations to repay under whatever conditions were signed but those investors have zero say in the running of spacex.

>>11835726
I do wonder whether some of the investors are space nuts like us who'd see the loss of their investment as no big deal as long as it's helping bring about progress in space exploration

>>11835750
Not in the same way or extent a public company would.
>>11835756

>>11835737
>SpaceX is a private, not a public company
Good job reading my post
>He owns it in the same way I own my gym shorts
Who you been sharing your shorts with? He's not the sole proprietor, he does have obligations. He has much more leeway than a public company, though.

>>11835756
>those investors have zero say in the running of spacex
you can't know this unless you know their contract and how much of spacex they own

>>11835763
> Who you been sharing your shorts with?

Some black dude who goes to the same gym.

> He's not the sole proprietor, he does have obligations.

We have no idea who the investors are, how many of them there are, and what the obligations are. Could just be “launch rokkit lol”or “squat on Mars”

>>11835767
>you can't know this unless you know their contract
true. but again it's a totally different game to if they were shareholders in a public company.
>and how much of spacex they own
an american knowing which state spacex incorporated in would have to check who were shareholders beyond musk (it could just be musk), in which case they own none of it, they just lent the company money.
>t. a guy in the uk who has just set up a ltd company, admittedly on a far simpler basis but having to go through all the paperwork, and knowing us law works largely in the same way ours does

>>11835692
Launchers rarely carry payloads super close to their mass capacity, so there's usually a decent margin there. Not sure how close they're comfortable with cutting it, though.

>>11835680
Come back when you have a Real Solar System with real launchsites.

Actually, it's a good question, why /sfg/ are so shit they don't play KSP + Real Solar System + Realism Overhaul?

Everything you need for full-on space autismo is listed here, there are detailed instructions on how to get everything going.

Also, post airlaunch systems.

Would a Martian colony have a section in the aquaponic farm used to grow weed, and other medical plants?
The CBD and THC oil does show medical uses, and they could keep that shit on lockdown
Not looking to be Martian stoner but it’s hard to deny it’s usefulness

>>11835806
My computer already takes half an hour to load stock KSP.

>>11835813
>smoking moonweed with your friends as Earth eclipses the Sun
Sounds pretty comfy to me.

>>11835812
Forgot link
https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/wiki/RO-&-RP-1-Installation-for-1.8.1

>Regardless of whether securities in the offering have been or may be sold to persons who do not qualify as accredited investors, enter the total number of investors who already have invested in the offering: 11
>Space Exploration Technologies Corp filing date 13/03/2020
There's a list of investors too, it's all public - https://sec.report/Document/0001181412-20-000001/

>>11835829
>investors
*Directors

>>11835806
>why /sfg/ are so shit they don't play KSP + Real Solar System + Realism Overhaul?
Because it already takes me a while to design a vehicle in stock KSP. I would never leave the VAB if I played Gran Autismo KSP.

>>11835813
>aquaponics
probably
>weed and medicinals
probably not for a long time
early martians will be healthy adults with minimal dependencies and efficient use of space and energy dictates that dedicating non-food crop is a low priority for compared to its space and energy expenditure

>>11835822
They’d probably have vaporizers to avoid combustion in the habitats and in your lungs
Like the promise of a juul except styled like a falcon rocket and doesn’t make the user look like a faggot

>>11835841
Still, medical supplies would run out eventually even with healthy populous
Having a renewable medicine supply would be useful once it got big enough

>>11835806
because I like playing real scale GPP instead of RSS, although the extra launch sites is a little janky compared to RSS

>>11835851
weed isn't medicine. idgaf if you like getting high. i like getting high, and on far more than a joint. but pretending it's some magic drug is just cope for people who should be telling the state to gtfo of their lives.
if you want to grow weed on mars just do it, stop asking for permission or making excuses. we're leaving to put a stop to that shit.

>>11835851
what are you going to run out of that you can replace with weed and plants? some pills and injections? not anything that takes up much room in an SS cargo bay or that you can really replicate prior to having advanced infrastructure (at which point sure, you basically have anything humans have)

>>11835871
Libertarian Mars when

>>11835898
they'll definitely be some libertarian colonies eventually

>>11835898
Yesterday

>>11835871
I think CBD is useful for kids with constant seizures and stuff, but yeah otherwise I'm with you. I don't need to pretend it's medicine to justify why I smoke.

>>11835215
>Where the hell did the other 99.9999999999999% of energy go?
heat, objects that absorb light very well heat up a lot.

>>11835906
"i enjoy it" should be justification enough,

>tfw spent 5 fucking hours getting my aerobee knockoff to actually work with a solid booster first stage and not tear itself apart on launch or fail to ignite the second stage because of fuel instability
christ what an exercise in suffering
I finally got something with working with performance roughly equivalent to the original aerobee though, it can carry my instruments up to about 140-150km if it's a good day and doesn't go off course at launch but it really needs the bigass launch tower they used with the actual aerobee launches to keep them on course until going fast enough for the fins to stabilize it

>>11835314
>10.625x GPP instead of real solar system
>10.625x GPP
>Tellumo at 10.625x stock scale
just fuck my shit up, senpai

>>11835919
And "why should you get to tell me I can't" as a followup.

>>11835925
hope u brought some boosters :)))))))

>>11835429
She's totally correct. She's looking at Mars and seeing just as many women as men; zero.

>>11835186
God let me witness this in the future

>>11835932
>dooooooooming
humans are going to mars. dwi.

>>11835535
>Anyone else depressed over the fact that manned spaceflight is going nowhere for the foreseeable future?
Have you heard about what they're doing down in Boca? Do you understand why this /sfg/ thread exists and what started it? I'll give you a hint, HOP WHEN was the defining meme at the time.

>>11835932
Ok doomer.

>>11835594
Sewing is super easy, very soon after getting people onto Mars a few sewing machines and a few rolls of good quality cloth with thread would be a great package to send.

>>11835871
>>11835906
Tell that to people suffering from parkinsons.

>>11835567
So what you're saying is that Elon's entire mission in his life is all a lie? That's literally the whole point of his companies. He made Starlink for the sole purpose of making money here on earth so he can funnel those profits into making Mars a reality via Space X. Its function as a company isn't the same as a normal company.

I would agree with you in regards to Blue Origin (Bezos), not for SpaceX.

>>11835949
I did mention CBD though.

>>11835957
CBD doesn't help parkinson patients.

>>11835949
if people find a use from smoking a plant then great, more power to them. but you know as i do that this whole omg weed! culture has built up around a totally unscientific narrative that is an attempt to circumnavigate laws that restrict that vast majorities hobby. thats it. stop being embarrassed that you just like to get high. it's fine and there's nothing wrong with it.

>>11835958
Then why'd you bring it up?

>>11835962
Because the other cannabinoids actually do help them.

>>11835294
>if photons have mass and can be used for propulsion why can't you just hang a bid ol' laser out the back of you ship and turn it on?
you can, it's just absolutely fucking tiny amount of thrust
>why bother with the sails n sheeeit.
1. you have to carry an absolutely fucking enormous energy source with you to power the laser and thats fucking heavy and you get rocket equationed into complete impracticality
2. emitting the photons yourself only gets you half the thrust that reflecting photons does, with a laser you get one kick for each photon you through away but with a sail you get one kick when the incoming photon hits your sail and then a second kick when you emit the reflected photon back out again

>>11835567
>spacex can't launch anything without government approval

Doesn’t matter. They can get government approval.

> and a for-profit company has no incentive to throw money at mars for no reason

SpaceX does what Elon wants it to do

>>11835968
>you can, it's just absolutely fucking tiny amount of thrust

No; the recoil from firing the laser would cancel out any thrust. That’s like trying to push a sail with a fan on the boat.

>>11835350
Kansas, actually. Its probably the best museum I've ever been to. They have actual V2 rockets (maybe even a V1, don't remember), an SR-71 suspended from the ceiling in the lobby and whole exhibit outside the food court, the Liberty Bell 7, the Apollo 13 capsule, a ton of Russian shit, and various items from every era of the space race on both sides. Oh, they also have a Redstone rocket outside that you can climb to the top of on stairs.

I just wanted to know if the other space museums were that badass.

>>11835960
Dude I don't even smoke anymore, I haven't touched the shit in over 20 years. I find the whole dude weed lmao shit fucking disgraceful personally, but denying that there is actual medical usage for it besides meme CBD oil is also fucking disgraceful.

Last post of mine on this topic, derailed enough.

>>11835973
Who cares if there’s medical usage or not
FREEEEEDOOOOOOOOM

>>11835937
>>11835943
Hey retards, I'm talking about right now.
How many people are living on Mars at this moment?
How did I know you fucking faggots would interpret what I said that way, god damn.

I've been thinking of Starlink/swarm satellites utility in space for a bit. For example, can we make a 1000+ swarm satellite that can be used to fire a weaponized laser(some state of the art laser that has minimal impact on atmospheric interference) down to earth to hit any target on earth? A collection of maybe 5-10 satellite with good chunk battery pack each concentrating its power and heating up a surface 200-300 miles downward?

For example, Starlink is roughly the size of a car, so if each one has something like 50-100kwh of battery, if we form a swarm of 10 of those, it will give us 500kwh/1000kwh laser power for use.

Im uncertain what state of the art laser range is and how it affects the atmosphere. I know there's curvature of earth issue with ground lasers and some atmospheric interference with low powered lasers, but are we at the stage of weaponizing orbital laser guns yet?

>>11835973
>Last post of mine on this topic, derailed enough.
same, and also a former smoker. yes it has it's uses. but those are a tiny minority and are mainly pushed by people with no conditions who just want to get high but won't admit it.
anyway space flight.

>>11835949
People with parkinsons will not be going to Mars.

>>11835970
retard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_rocket

>>11835965
Alright.

>>11835982
Who knows, there could be a use for that in medical studies. How does lower gravity affect neurological diseases.
If there's ever a full colony set up or even a large scale scientific outpost, shit like that isn't too far fetched.

>>11835970
>No; the recoil from firing the laser would cancel out any thrust. That’s like trying to push a sail with a fan on the boat.
Dummy, the recoil from the laser IS the thrust. You fire the laser off into space and accelerate in the opposite direction.
If you instead dispense with the laser and use a mirror, and you have a bright, far away light source to use, reflecting those incoming photons back int e direction they came gives you double the thrust.
He's not talking about firing a laser at a sail on the same spacecraft.

>>11835948
The time and energy of the colonists will be too valuable to waste on that for a while, though. It's a job for machines if we're going to be perfectly honest here.
Manual sewing skills are necessary but their application should be reserved for emergency situations. Just like, I dunno, knowing how to drill holes with a stick, some sand and a string or something to that effect.

>>11835980
Or rather how far away are we from this type of laser weaponization?

Imagine DOD investing $10 billion laser satellite swarm in space, so they can zap anyone on earth, at anytime, and its reusable in long term due to solar panels recharging their capacity and instantly via satellites rotating and shifting to different positions.

>>11835980
>but are we at the stage of weaponizing orbital laser guns yet?
No, and we're a ways off. Lots of problems with laser weapons firing through atmosphre that you can't solve by changing the laser; shit like dust in the air.

>>11835023
You only talk about food, but all the structures and machinery needed to make habitats, make air, produce the energy required etc, aren't light.
The real number of tons needed would be much higher.

>>11835991
Not until we have millions of people on Mars already. Just shut the fuck up about space weed for the next five decades, okay?

>>11835995
sewing and repairing clothing/parachutes/whatever would be imo a pretty important skill to have, especially if combined with some knowledge of materials engineering for what to use and when.

>>11835995
>The time and energy
A few hours of leisure time? Working on an enjoyable and useful hobby? Just shut the fuck up lmao.

>>11835984
That’s not how photon rockets work. Photon rockets work by emitting photons from one end, causing the craft to accelerate as per the third law. If the rocket had a laser and shot it at itself, it wouldn’t go anywhere. That’s like the “troll physics” meme in which you become strong enough to lift your own weight and the weight of a chair, then sit in a chair and pull upwards, achieving flight. Funny but doesn’t work

>>11836007
nobody said anything about shooting the laser at the rocket retard, see >>11835994

>>11836001
Yeah, his math is off. So cut the population in half and send 500 tons of non-food cargo per year, and devote at least 100 tons of that non-food cargo to equipment that lets the colonists grow their own god damn food so we don't need to send it.

>>11835623
>colony
Absolute meme. A permanent base isn't a colony. The only way to get a colony to grow on Mars is profits and sustained immigration. Highly educated women do not have children at above replacement rate, this will be true for Mars colonists as well. There is no economic incentive for going to Mars beyond furthering space infrastructure (and the Moon and asteroids are vastly superior for that), everything else you can do up there you can do better on Earth.

>>11836012
Oh yeah sorry I thought they were talking about a ship shooting a laser at its own sail and hoping to go anywhere

>>11836004
I did mention that knowing how to do that would be necessary.

>>11836006
>A few hours of leisure time?
Which I'd rather spend reading either something educational or just fiction.

>Working on an enjoyable and useful hobby?
Not enjoyable for me and there are more useful hobbies. Besides, hobbies aren't supposed to be inherently useful.

Just shut the fuck up lmao.

>>11836015
It's (you) again. Had fun on the river while you shat up the last thread. Might have to do it again if you don't fuck off.

>>11836015
> Highly educated women do not have children at above replacement rate

Don’t bring highly educated women. They’re basically soulless zombies who have lost all purpose in life.

>>11836019
original dumbass here. no i meant like if you literally pointed a laser pointer out the back of a cubesat.

>>11836007
>If the rocket had a laser and shot it at itself, it wouldn’t go anywhere.
He literally never said that that would work. You're misinterpreting his post. He was literally just comparing a photon rocket (just fires a laser out the back) to a photon sail (photons from a separate source come in and reflect off of a mirror, producing twice the momentum transfer per photon).

>>11836020
all the new spacex pressure suits are handmade. it's a very important trade that i can't see being replicated by a robot any time soon. imo.

>>11835980
The issue with lasers is the atmospheric distortion, optical telescopes and the airborne laser system have expensive adaptive mirrors to compensate for the distortion

>>11836015
>There is no economic incentive for going to Mars beyond furthering space infrastructure (and the Moon and asteroids are vastly superior for that)
Mars has unlimited water and CO2 to use as well as Phobos and Deimos to exploit, your argument is invalid.
Despite being much closer, the Moon is harsh enough that if we start colonizing both worlds at once (and why wouldn't we), Mars will reach self sufficiency first, Mars will start launching missions further out into the soalr system first, Mars will begin constructing gigantic orbital factories first, and Mars will conduct the first successful asteroid mining ventures, leading directly to the colonization of the entire asteroid belt via rotating habitats and low g mining and factories.

>>11836025
Yeah that’d work. There’s problems with actually using such a design; including thrust that would make a Hall thruster look like an F-1, and the fact photons don’t come from nowhere. You’d have to have an onboard or ideally beamed power source to supply the laser beam with energy, or some unknown method by which you could store a particle fuel and annihilate all or some of it into photons.

>>11835991
>Who knows, there could be a use for that in medical studies. How does lower gravity affect neurological diseases.
If there's ever a full colony set up or even a large scale scientific outpost, shit like that isn't too far fetched.
That is what we will have rotating stations in earth orbit for.

>>11836020
>Which I'd rather spend reading either something educational or just fiction.
Okay, who said YOU need to use the sewing machine? If you don't want to that's fine, but guess what retard, other people like to sew shit together. It's a constructive hobby and extremely useful in any situation where you find yourself millions of kilometers away from the nearest walmart.

>>11836051
>you could store a particle fuel and annihilate all or some of it into photons
Good luck reflecting those ultra high energy gamma rays, by the way.

>>11836054
it's like he doesn't understand the basics of trade. everything must either be dictated or a hobby. that someone could specialise in the repair of textiles because it's what they enjoy, and also to make a living out of it, eludes him.

>>11836044
Mars has basically all the other resources you could ever want, too. The Moon has a lot of very specific things but will be stuck importing from the Earth or Mars for vital materials.

>>11835980
We already have missiles that can hit anywhere on earth. I don't see the point desu.

>>11836070
>Mars has basically all the other resources you could ever want, too.

Among them, isolation and territory. I want as far away from the crazies on Earth as I can get

>>11836023
Doesn't matter. You still have the same problem if the men are educated. The moment you have basic amenities people stop having children. They literally need to live impoverished if you want to have above-replacement fertility. This is a constant in the entirety of the western world. You CANNOT have a high-tech society and high birth rates naturally. The only group that bucks this trend in a significant way are the orthodox jews in Israel.
>>11836022
Please tell me how I'm wrong. I'd love to see a healthy self-sustaining space colony in my lifetime. I just don't see it happening, logically.
>>11836044
Being able to sustain yourself is NOT enough to grow a colony. You need economical benefits for the people living there. The rest of your points are delusional. It will take decades, if not a century until Mars can even start to compete with Earth.

>>11836083
>No I won't be one of the first people to colonize another planet, it will be bad for muh shekels? t. 100% of all living beings on Earth
Imagine believing this

>>11836083
>Please tell me how I'm wrong
Shitposting in /sfg/ for (you)s is generally wrong bahavior.

>>11836042
Mirrors are just heated up sand, raw materials for mirrors are in pennies per hundreds of kg.

The cost of those "expensive adaptive mirrors" are purely driven by dod's inefficient contracts and not a product of limits of physics or even the constraints of the market economics.

>>11836083
>Developed nations are intrinsically unstable and will die out

Sounds more like a cultural rot than something intrinsic to highly developed nations. Wonder what sort of long-nosed tribe could have perpetrated that. Mormon colony when?

>>11836007
even if you fired the laser at your own sail you would still get the thrust, it would just be in the direction that it bounces off the sail instead of the direction your laser is pointing

>>11836111
Lasers have recoil. It’d either cancel it out or move in the direction the laser fires; because all energy transformations are inefficient. More energy would be available for conversion to momentum when the laser fires than when it hits the sail

>>11836066
this is why communism always fails

>>11836059
Just build a gamma ray mirror :^)

>>11836141
Or get the Hulk to soak 'em up.

>>11836118
Equal and opposite, nog. You only produce net thrust in the opposite direction that you're throwing shit away, whatever that shit is.

>>11835680
>you can build shit that looks like actual rockets.
KSP has gotten way better at this compared to beta versions.
Though you still need RO for the full autism experience.

>>11836118
laser recoil pushes in opposite direction of beam
photons impacting sail pushes in opposite direction of recoil
photons being emitting again as they bounce off sail pushes in opposite direction of wherever they are going, giving you net thrust
the thrust only cancels out if the laser beam is completely absorbed by the sail, which doesn't happen

>>11836118
The mirror would produce pretty much twice the thrust of the laser, but the laser would obviously cancelling out half of it, so the net result would be slightly less acceleration than if you just spin around and fired the laser off into space directly.

>>11836141
Okay Isaac Arthur

>>11835970
>That’s like trying to push a sail with a fan on the boat.
The only reason that doesn't work is because the air from the fan gets absorbed and lost in the surrounding atmosphere, if you had a collimated beam of fan air like a laser and bounced it off a sail without anything interfering it would work fine

>>11836182
Correct. Note that that contraption would produce as much thrust as the laser alone, just in the direction opposite to the original laser emission.

>>11836083
>You CANNOT have a high-tech society and high birth rates naturally. The only group that bucks this trend in a significant way are the orthodox jews in Israel.
Mormons have high birth rates as well. All this leads to is generally proving that religion is good for society.

We’ve already got something better than photon sails
https://www.centauri-dreams.org/2017/12/29/the-plasma-magnet-drive-a-simple-cheap-drive-for-the-solar-system-and-beyond/
All we need to do is test it beyond the magnetosphere, and find a way to make it viable for manned space travel times

>starlink launch delayed again
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

>>11836215
please stop shilling this shit, anon. Nobody gives a fuck.

>>11836215
how to slow down

>>11836238
just do some cost-plus contracting when you get to your destination

>>11836187
How does the mirror produce more thrust?

>>11836247
lol

>>11836247
kek

>>11836234
>please stop shilling this shit, anon. Nobody gives a fuck.
why though, it is a great idea

>>11836250
Light emission, be it from a laser or just something glowing, and light absorption, have half of the momentum transfer of light reflection.

Say the laser is retard strong and produces one newton of thrust. If you put a perfect black body object in from of that laser, just imagine a disk that absorbs the wavelength of laser light 100%, that disk will feel one newton of thrust from the laser light hitting it.
Now, replace the black body disk with a perfect mirror. The same amount of light from the laser is hitting the disk as last time, but now instead of 'stopping' (being absorbed) it is 'bouncing' (reflecting) off of the disk, and since the light is moving at the same speed when it arrives as it does after it bounces, just in the opposite direction, the thrust MUST be doubled for momentum to be conserved.
For the mirror disk to only have as much thrust force as the laser, the light would need to come to a stop after striking the mirror, which makes no sense.

>>11836261
It's pretty irrelevant to the present day and even for the next few decades. You're basically responding to everything with "Well you could always use an Orion drive", and yeah, you're not wrong, but that's not helpful because no one's ever gonna build an Orion drive.

>>11836261
Everything's been said, go test it.
Not that guy and I don't really care, but you're gonna become p*****fag in a hurry if you cry for attention every time someone talks about any other form of propulsion

>>11836284
Exactly, just let it go, anon. Someone else will ask about it eventually and that'll be your time to shine.

>>11836281
>You're basically responding to everything with "Well you could always use an Orion drive", and yeah, you're not wrong, but that's not helpful because no one's ever gonna build an Orion drive.
Why though? It doesn't have nearly any of the red tape orion drives have.

>guys
>what if we take our V2
>and we take our aerobee
>and we put the aerobee on top of the V2
holy shit guys wheres my nobel prize

>>11834799
>to delay sending a crewed mission to the Moon until 2028
Oh that's some petty political bullshit. They just want to deny Trump the win.

>>11835302
SS also doesn't require DoD / DoE signoff for using nukes.

>>11836310
That may be one part of it, but the biggest part of it is that they really don't fucking care if the mission gets taken behind the shed and shot or not. All that matters is that they get to go back to their constituents and tell them how many Boing or whatever jobs they brought to them during their period and that's why they should vote for them again.

Ride that gravy train.

Where can I find the information about Falcon Heavy with an elongated fairing?

>>11835294
>if photons have mass and can be used for propulsion why can't you just hang a bid ol' laser out the back of you ship and turn it on? why bother with the sails n sheeeit.
Photon rocket thrust efficiency is 300MW/N. It only works if you're doing direct annihilation of antimatter and have mirrors that can reliably reflect gamma rays.

>>11834935
>UN logo on the starship

gayer than AIDS, though I'm sure in reality they'll try and insert themselves into a Mars mission so they can take credit

>>11835535
Trump will win.

>>11835812
>XB-70 Mach 3 airlaunch
Wouldn't that thing's shitty aerodynamics suck the rocket back in on separation like it ate a test plane?

>>11836215
Waiting for Starship lunar rideshare. At that point a 6U Cubesat becomes possible.

>>11834799
I feel like private industry can do it without Nasa or the government at this point

>>11836334
>inb4 they make SpaceX carry a little rover and leave it on the surface for them so they can advertise that they're involved in the Mars Base project

>>11835535
Are you implying that Trump is responsible for commercial crew?

>>11836409
He is. He helped it along

>>11836409
nah
trump is just so hated by his opposition that anything that flourishes under his term is liable to get fucked with when he is out

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1276215639829475328 elon just tweeted, if you have a question, ask it now

>>11836418
Just point out to critics that Obama started it and watch their minds lock up.

>>11836418
He's rightly hated for being an idiot. The Space Program is popular with the public so I highly doubt they'll cancel projects.

>>11836418
this. Not voting for trump but a likely consequence of biden winning (not as likely as you think) might be artemis getting fucked. I bet commercial crew will be ok for a while though

>>11836432
Projects like Constellation?

>>11836442
Ignore the namefagging. I was on /a/ a little bit ago.

>>11836442
Constellation was en even bigger trash fire than SLS

>>11836432
>The Space Program is popular with the public
In what fucking decade, I've had people ask me if there was already a manned Mars landing. You overestimate the normie.

>>11836457
> I've had people ask me if there was already a manned Mars landing
good one. i've heard a few people refer to "the moon base" and a family member thought the space station was "next to the sun"

Will we one day cross the great darkness between the stars, bros?

>>11836468
It’s kind of sad in a way. They think we’ve gotten farther than we really have.

hey guys
what if we spend a bunch of money developing a space launch capability
then we cancel it because it costs too much
then we spend even more money than it would have costed paying someone else to launch stuff into space instead lol

>>11836334
>another gross misunderstanding of what the UN is on the internet
what's new?

Berger posted new Blue Origin/National Team renderings and details on Twitter. The crew capsule was redesigned.
https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1276184479879647233

>>11836488
Did they pick up on us calling is the mismatched autist stack?

Honestly, it's not much better. Now it's a round portapotty.

>>11835133
NASA did, in the 60s
they got the rug pulled out from under them when the Apollo program was cancelled and lost the drive to succeed and went with the much less development intensive shuttle you know and love instead of the full-reuse shuttle they wanted

>>11836468
Depressing when people lack even rudimentary understanding of something you find inherently interesting. I've been having to explain what Commercial Crew is and why it's a thing a lot to people lately when they ask what's going on with "that spacex stuff, saw sumthin' about it on teevee"

>>11836488
In a world without SpaceX, the national lander would be great.

But Starship blows it out of the water.

>His Martian base doesn’t have integral biological components
Reminder that a truly self sustaining base needs a complete ecosystem where humans are a careful, planning keystone species
Make sure that your greywater garden trough has sufficient bee, ant and spider attention

>>11836507
Well to be fair the whole Space thing is a niche interest.

Unlike cars or music or other hobbies, space exploration appears to have little effect on our lives. That’s why so many people don’t support it.

It also takes a special sort of person to be interested in space exploration. Someone who finds beauty or wonder or maybe even necessity on these alien worlds. Of course, many people ARENT like that by default.

So your average Joe Schmoe will look at the pictures of say Asteroid Bennu by OSIRIS-REX and mutter to themselves “Damn we spend a billion dollars on a mission to take some pictures of a rock”. Technically he’s not wrong, but he also lacks any sort of creativity or even drive to look deeper into the mission.

But as a consequence people often see Space Exploration as a waste of money. “We have enough problems on Earth” is actually a very common mindset. I mean shit look at politicians like Bernie Sanders, who believes that manned space exploration should be cut and that space should be used for climate monitoring. It sounds awful if not evil to the mind of someone like me or you. Someone who sees a future of humans in space. Yet here’s even an example of someone who is supposedly incredibly well informed and has all the time in the world to research the benefits of space travel, and still chooses to axe it because “we have enough problems on Earth”

Disturbingly, I’ve found that a lot of people are relating to the “whiteys on the moon” clip from First Man. First of all that movie was good, but it was pretty shit when some parts seemed overtly political. Second, they don’t realize that much more money is spent on social programs as is, that even defunding NASA won’t do jack shit in the long run to help battle poverty.

So in the end, space exploration is a niche interest that your average normie has a hard time relating to, and thus, they simply lack the drive to look into it.

>>11836479

>>11836551
I just want to be a cyborg with no meat

>>11836581
>>11836479
>British scientists, on discovering the program was cancelled days before the only orbital launch, renamed the satellite Prospero after the character in the tempest who gives up his magic
Sad

>>11836588
My dream unironically is to have my brain and spinal cord and some other organs placed into a metallic body. From there I’d be launched into space and used to explore airless worlds for the several hundred years.

>Mfw get to walk on the surface or Enceladus without a suit
>Mfw get to watch to sunrise from mercury with my own eyes
>Mfw I can actually feel the sands of IO on my skin

>russia signed another tourist flight with space adventures
>mission will go to the iss in 2023
>1 of the 2 tourists will perform a spacewalk eva with a cosmonaut
oh shit
https://twitter.com/katlinegrey/status/1276137745476390913

>>11836612
A dumb webcomic I like had this sort of happen in the end, the main (surviving) cyborg character just starts traveling around trying to find "the end of the universe", augmenting over time and eventually harvesting some of the last energy in existance before reaching the end of the universe. Made this pic years back to show just how long he had to fart around space before getting there.

>>11836612
>Mfw get to walk on the surface or Enceladus without a suit
>Mfw get to watch to sunrise from mercury with my own eyes
>Mfw I can actually feel the sands of IO on my skin

Hnnng
To walk where no one has walked before beneath alien stars, sprinkled across the Stygian blackness

>>11836581
pls no bully

chinese space art

>>11836630

>>11834942
that's more than two ISS masses per year

>>11836612
We all know how well that ends

>>11836447
you're a gay nigger on /a/ and you're a gay nigger here

>>11836635
The flesh is weak.

>>11836630
>>11836632
I want to pay an artist to make a drawing in this style of a spent stage buried in a smoldering village-hut with spicy orange smoke all over the place.

>>11836625
I want to be a nicer version of the Tet.
Drifting around the universe, harvesting resources from the comet clouds of various systems, maybe sending down a mechanical avatar to explore interesting worlds and share knowledge with any intelligent species I find. Maybe do a little uplifting if I find a promising animal.

God damn, the “Blue Origin” national team Artemis lander looks like absolute shit. Why does it have like 5 fucking stages?? And it leaves one stage behind on the lunar surface... have we not improved reusability since Apollo? Jeff Bezos doesn’t give a fuck, he’s just dishing out money to his little rocket club at this point

>>11836630
is UDMH good for dragons?

>>11836685
Blue Origin doesn't have a fucking rocket yet, so this all has to launch on shitty oldspace boosters.

>>11836630
>putting open food near a chinese rocket
yeah thats gonna end well

>>11836685
You don’t even need staging for a moon lander.

>>11836630
>American dragons are battling Chinese dragons for space domination
this timeline is something else

>>11836685
every lander drops stages at some point
the Dynetics lander drops crasher tanks into the lunar surface downrange (they can't even be recovered, they just smash into the surface) but at least they don't leave any engines behind

>>11836691
How do you think they burn down villages?

>>11836757
You need less than 5kms delta/v to land and go back up on Luna. Why are they bothering with staging?

why dont you just have astronauts fill the lander with moonrocks and then open the door and throw them downwards to take off and go back to earth

>>11836691
Only if your dragon is named Smaug and likes to desolate things.

>>11836773
>>11836773
Unironically it’s because they’re lazy. Really. They don’t want to spend more on R and D on making a 100% reusable vehicle, so they decided “Ah we reuse most of it that’s close enough”. Really.

>>11836685
Unironically even the king of oldspace, Lockheed Martin, planned on making a 100% reusable lunar lander. But NASA didn’t like their plan...for some reason.

Link to Lockheed’s PDF:

> https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/space/documents/ahead/LM-Crewed-Lunar-Lander-from-Gateway-IAC-2018-Rev1.pdf

I’d post the pic but my IP is blocked sorry brahs

>>11836432
Space program was popular with bush and that didn't stop obama from almost killing NASA. Also you only think trump is an idiot because he's portrayed that way in the media.

>>11836757
>every lander drops stages at some point
Starship doesn't.

>>11836798
Yeah what's the story behind Lockheed? They gave their offer to NASA before NASA was even asking for lander designs. My tin-foil-hat theory is that they immediately rejected them because they knew they wanted to go with Boeing, but then boeing fucked up. Also the fact that their lander ran on hydromeme fuel didn't help but I'm sure NASA didnt care

>>11836798
I just don't understand this lander at all. Its basically useless, at least the dynetics lander makes sense

>>11836822
>Official render from Lockheed Martin
>Boldly shows the Taiwan Flag front and center on the lander
BASED!

>>11836822
Looks fine to me; and hydrolox is a perfectly viable fuel in the context

>>11836824
Lockheed lander is unironically the best out of all the designs (except starship).

>>11836822
I think you’re probably right about the Boeing thing.

It just seems stupid that they’d axe this lander in favor of something like the “National Team”. Which is only partially reusable and requires three different vehicles.

Believe it or not ULA - that ULA - had some great lunar lander concepts. Too bad they lack the get up and go SpaceX has.

>>11836841
ULA has a lot of very smart people working on very stupid projects.

>>11836831
>>11836841
I agree, the Lockheed design is fucking cool. It IS flying in a Vacuum so hydrolox isn't necessarily a bad thing... but if you slapped some BE-4 on this baby and had it run on Methalox is would be a beast. In a perfect world where I ran Lockheed, I would change it to Methalox and sell it as a "precursor" to a Methalox Mars lander. I hope Lockheed flourishes in the new age of spaceships- they are a much better company than Boeing

I just don't understand this reusable lander meme.

>>11836851
If I had Lockheed stock I'd show up at every shareholder meeting to advocate restarting commercial airliner production to eat Boing!'s lunch and push for the Methalox X-Wing Shuttle design to compete with Starship.

>>11836852
It turns out putting mass in lunar orbit is very expensive so if you have a reusable lander it's cheaper for subsequent missions.

>>11836851
Starship and DC-X’s drunken lovechild confronting spacex en route
>”Alright Dad. I’m gonna start my own Martian colony, with hydrolox and khazar milkers...”

>>11836851
This would be based. ULA could do the R&D for a reusable first stage and instead of slapping a shitty boeing capsule on top they could have Lockheed make the second stage
>>11836852
We are living in a new age of spaceflight. Landing something on the Moon and leaving half your lander behind (and therefore half your engines and hardware) is a relic from the Apollo era and is a HUGE waste of money.

>>11836852
I just don't understand this reusable lander meme.

The amount of money you can save from reusing landers isn’t enough to justify how much harder it makes it to perform the difficult landings that usually make money in the lunar cargo world. I’m sure one day reusability will be more effective, but the truth is that when you have all the challenges that come with rocket science in general, it’s almost always much more effective to throw away the lander after it’s done its job than to figure out how to make recovery part of the mission. I know of no major technology on the near term horizon that would change that.

Even if reusable landers are possible now, but when reliability is THE number one priority (in this case the cargo takes up 2/3rds of the cost and the actual lander only 1/3rd) it makes absolutely no sense. Like, look at this lander (pic related). This represents some of the most advanced technologies in the aerospace world. Do you honestly think that such a complicated machine can be made tough and reliable enough to be reusable? I doubt it. Best example in my opinion is condoms, sure you could reuse them but making sure that they do not suffer a drop in reliability will cost a lot of money and time.

Just because some company has made reusing landers popular, then that doesn't mean that we will have the sci-fi future of thousands of landings per year. We'll be lucky to see more than a couple dozen per year. Dial down your expectations, don't buy into the 'reusability for landers' meme.

>>11836852
>reusing land
Salt the earth and burn it when you're done with it.

>>11836864
Are.. Are you mentally ill?

>>11836864
Guys I think Shelby has entered the thread

>>11836864
>there are people who are the CEOs of the largest and most influential companies in the world who actually believe this

>>11836858
>>11836851
Honestly a cool idea but remember that Hydrolox is actually pretty easy to refine in space. I’d argue that it’s even easier than methalox.

Putting a nuclear reactor on the lunar pole will let you sublimate ice into hydrolox easy peasy, and there’s no need to refine it from H2 + O2 into methane.

So hydrolox does make sense. If an ISRU base was established at the lunar pole, it would be a “free” lander. All you need to do is send up the crew to the moon, as the lander would refuel using ISRU.

Also water is pretty common among the Near Earth Asteroids. Even asteroid Bennu, which OSIRIS-REX is orbiting, has active spouts of water vapor every once in a while.

the idea of a "lander" in general is pretty outdated at this point in the era of Starship desu

general purpose (reusable ofc) craft with either crew or cargo variants are the future

>>11836864
>blocks your path

>>11836330
Truth. Photon based propulsion only really works if you can make extremely thin and large mirrors, or you can make extremely perfect mirrors, because either way you need stupid amounts of light in order to get significant accelerations.

>>11836875
>I’d argue that it’s even easier than methalox

Depends on where you are.

On Mars, methalox is massively easier because you can suck 90% of the weight of the fuel out of the atmosphere, so you don't have to dig up nearly as much water.

some of you guys are stillborn new

>>11836879

>. HE BUILT A REUSABLE LANDER, JUST LIKE AS A MOVE

>HE CANT KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT

>he cant keep getting away with it

>>11836869
It’s a copypasta meme indigenous to /sfg/. Months ago someone said it unironically in reference to reusable rockets in general

>>11836875
>I’d argue that it’s even easier than methalox

You need hydrogen to make methane anyway

>>11836864
the pasta is correct, the complexity inherent in spaceflight makes it permanently prohibitively difficult

>inb4 "starship simply WONT have issues didn't you hear what elon said"

>>11836894
>Falcon 9 doesn’t exist

Meme

>>11836875
>there are people who are the CEOs of the largest and most influential companies in the world who actually believe this
They would eventually have to accept change or be left behind.

>>11836877
I just don't understand this reusable general purpose craft meme...

>>11836886
Really? Got a link to it?

>>11836894
Shoo Shelby.

>>11836350
No, first off the XB-70 Valkyrie had good aerodynamics especially for the time, and second the crash was 100% the fault of the F-104 pilot who got too close to the much larger aircraft in the worst possible place; directly under the wingtip. This made the F-104's aerodynamic lift become unbalanced, causing it to pitch up and roll over.
A rocket performing an air launch from underneath a Valkyrie would first of all not be bothered by aerodynamic downwash, and secondly it would not even be in an area of significant downwash, because it would be mounted near the center of the aircraft and when released would fall straight down and away.
All that being said, air launch is stupid for other reasons I won't get into here.

>>11836894
I just don't understand this reusable airplane meme.

The amount of money you can save from reusing planes isn’t enough to justify how much harder it makes it to complete the difficult flights that usually make money in the air travel world. I’m sure one day reusability will be more effective, but the truth is that when you have all the challenges that come with aeronautical engineering in general, it’s almost always much more effective to throw away the plane after it’s done its job than to figure out how to make recovery part of the mission. I know of no major technology on the near term horizon that would change that.

Even if reusable planes are possible now, but when reliability is THE number one priority (in this case the cargo takes up 2/3rds of the cost and the actual plane only 1/3rd) it makes absolutely no sense. Like, look at this jet engine (pic related). This represents some of the most advanced technologies in the propulsion engineering world. Do you honestly think that such a complicated machine can be made tough and reliable enough to be reusable? I doubt it. Best example in my opinion is condoms, sure you could reuse them but making sure that they do not suffer a drop in reliability will cost a lot of money and time.

Just because some company made reusing planes popular, then that doesn't mean that we will have the sci-fi future of millions of flights per year. We'll be lucky to see more than a couple dozen per year. Dial down your expectations, don't buy into the 'reusability for airplanes' meme.

>>11836899

>>11836886
Yeah I know i'm just kinda drunk right now and i forgot

>>11836894
Starship certainly WILL have issues, but Elon refuses to sit on his ass and let those issues hold the company back. Tbh I was surprised when they chose Dragon XL to resupply gateway... and I was fucking speechless when Jim announced Starship as an Artemis lander. The fact that Jim has more trust in Starship over other titans like Boeing and Lockheed make me believe it will work, and any problems will be fixed by SpaceX

>>11836897
falcon 9 has a partially refurbishable booster

>>11836901
forgot pic related

>>11836912
lmao

>>11836822
Why they need fridge in moon?

>>11836914
For cold ones they'll crack open with the boys.

>>11836914
keeping the beer cool retard

>>11835588
Not to mention the FCC lol.

>>11836910
Falcon 9’s booster is reusable. The Space Shuttle was refurbishable.

>>11836470
Yes, on the condition that we can colonize the Moon and Mars. Once those places have industrial capacity and can build up orbital habitats, the limits go away. It simply becomes a numbers game, and then there's a quadrillion people in the solar system it only takes one in a billion willing volunteers to put together an interstellar colonization fleet with a million people.

>>11836909
Remember that they chose multiple designs, each of which can go through iterations. It doesn't mean they trust spacex completely, just that they think elon has a good chance

>>11836914
Geologists only go if they can get a nice cold one after their field work

>>11836885
>Elon hyde

>>11836551
Enjoy dying because one type of mold in the soil was able to out compete another, lmao

>tfw you will never get to work at white sands with the boys back in the day
why live bros

>>11836914
Ice cream sandwiches, unless you want 'em freeze dried.

>"We had released a series of papers showing how a depot/refueling architecture would enable a human exploration program using existing (at the time) commercial rockets," Sowers tweeted on Wednesday. "Boeing became furious and tried to get me fired. Kudos to my CEO for protecting me. But we were banned from even saying the 'd' word out loud. Sad part is that ULA did a lot of pathfinding work in that area and could have owned the refueling/depot market, enriching Boeing (and Lockheed) in the process. But it was shut down because it threatened SLS."
United Launch Alliance concept for a propellant depot based on its ACES upper stage.
>Sowers' suggestion that "depots" should not be uttered in public is consistent with observations at the time that a US Senator from Alabama, Richard Shelby, had told NASA to stop talking about propellant depots. The NASA spaceflight center that manages the SLS rocket's development, Marshall Space Flight Center, is based in Alabama.

>>11836930
Because you might just get to work on mars instead.

>>11836930
At least you can visit the Alamogordo museum.

>>11836933
Does Richard Shelby really not care about space exploration?

>>11836551
Biosphere 2 was an utter failure... we don’t need to replicate that disaster on Mars

>>11836551
artificial ecosystems are a fantasy meme

>>11836933
>>11836933
ULA unironically has a bunch of cool concepts.

They even made a plan to actually colonize the Moon. Too bad it didn’t get much fanfare (or finding).

I love ULA. Got a bunch of PDFs and papers and stuff.

Actually Tory Bruno sent me a card and some gifts before my Junior Year homecoming dance in high school. I still have the box.

Only problem is that my IP is blocked and I can’t post pictures now.

>>11836948
Why is it blocked?

>>11836707
I'm sure there's some Chinese peasant farmer out there how scavenged a crashed booster segment and pulled out a few aluminum spheres, cut them in half, and is currently cooking rice in them.

>>11836951
No idea it just tells me that I can’t post files

>>11836933
Someone should find those research papers and send copies of it to Shelby every week.

>>11836941
He doesn't care. Only jobs in Alabama.

>putting together first orbit capable rocket with my late 1950s tech
>realize I'm gonna have to either take the SRB pill or make some big fuckoff R-7 liqiuid boosters because my engines and tanks are so shitty
bros... i don't feel so clean anymore....

>>11836630
based

>>11835737
Really? You share ownership of your gym shorts with other people? Compensate your hirelings with ownership of your gym shorts? Pretty odd desu.

>>11836966
do americans really not have communal shorts at gym?
wtf

>>11836877
Nukeships, whether Orion, thermal, or electric (including magsails), will change that, since they're inferior to chemical rockets for launch/landing.

>>11836941
He's somehow not the worst Senate candidate from Alabama in the past few years.
>Jeff "recusal" Sessions
>Roy "what if the 14 year old consents" Moore
>Doug "faggot" Jones
That whole state is cursed.

>>11836930
>They will destroy apollo capsules and saturn v because their creators were Nazi
Who really won the space race?

>>11836963
SRBs are great for their time. They're only memes in a world of expendable rockets.

>>11836975
Wasn't jeff forced to do a recusal though?

>>11836933
Someone should expend fucking Shelby, the refurbishment costs for a reusable senator are simply too high. Drop him in the sea.

>>11836798
>But NASA didn’t like their plan...for some reason.
It's probably because having reusable Lunar landers (especially ones that don't need to come back to Earth for refurbishment between missions) would mean that the mission cadence would be limited by SLS flight rates alone.
NASA doesn't want SLS to be seen as the road block preventing faster, cheaper access to the Moon, because that would raise questions like "why are we using SLS, don't we have other launch options for this one remaining bit of transport architecture?" and NASA KNOWS for a FACT that Elon would answer any tweet like that with "well we could probably make Dragon Lunar capable in like a year with a couple little modifications, NBD" and now suddenly SLS is on its way out the door.

The Artemis program literally only exists because of the LOPG program which literally only exists to justify SLS. LOPG has kinda been pushed to the side, I wouldn't be surprised if they just cancelled it (and I wouldn't be upset by that, either), which would mean SLS would have exactly one function, sending people to orbit the Moon on Orion, which is a VERY precarious situation for it to be in. The congresspeople that want those cost-plus shekels would NOT be happy.

>>11836814
Based

>>11836989
I'd take a plane across the atlantic to watch that launch from the bleachers.

>>11836978
*reusable

>>11836980
Not to the extent he did, and not without warning Trump before his nomination.

>>11836990
This post is extremely correct.

>>11836831
Hydrolox kinda sucks on the Moon because you need way more insulation than in deep space, and it's not like the insulation for deep space is insubstantial itself. Besides, you really don't need the ~460 Isp that hydrolox gets you in order to easily do single stage surface and back missions, much more conventional rocket propellants can afford that and with much smaller tanks too.
Side note, what kind of specific impulse do you get with nitrogen tetroxide oxidizer and propane fuel? Both of those propellants can be stored very easily compared to even LOx and methane, and are highly dense. I don't think they're hypergolic, but engine ignition is not a hard problem to solve at this point in history, so I don't think that matters too much.

>>11836083
Don't forget Mormons. Thanks for pointing out why religion is beneficial. And saying a Mars colony can't happen because the real resources are in the asteroid belt is beyond idiotic. Guess what's between us and the asteroid belt and has enough gravity to live on but not too much to make getting in and out of orbit a bitch? Mars. Your logic is basically on par with saying port cities are retarded because they don't have resources.

>>11836940
>museum has free admission
BASED
plague fucking off so they reopen and I can road trip over there when?

>>11837023
>plague fucking off
After the election probably. It's a real nice museum, apparently Ham the Space Chimp is buried there too under the flagpole. Seeing the V2 debris rusting away outside made me sad but it's still worth seeing.

>>11836864
Nice pasta

>>11836942
It was a failure because they shot themselves in the foot by not using available resources from outside. Their biggest problem was that their choice of concrete was sucking up all the CO2 released by the insect and human life, stunting plant growth rates. On Mars, we'd just blow in some additional CO2 from the propellant factory as need be. Relying completely on the stability of a micro ecosystem is retarded.

>>11836107
>Sounds more like a cultural rot than something intrinsic to highly developed nations.
It's hormonal birth control. Ban it, drop age of consent to 16, and watch birthrates skyrocket.

>>11836898
>Really? Got a link to it?
Just go back through /sfg/ threads, a couple months ago that pasta was fucking everywhere and just as insufferable as you'd expect.

>>11837093
>On Mars, we'd just blow in some additional CO2 from the propellant factory as need be
Or just like... outside. The air is 96% CO2.

>>11837097
You'd need some kind of thread-depot

>>11837099
Gotta get rid of the dust and warm it up

>>11837096
Cannot allow hormonal medications to enter the recycled water supply of any Martian settlement. Reproductive rights are one thing, fucking with my endocrine system because you want to fuck bareback with no worries is another, and unacceptable. Just get a fucking copper implant ffs.

>>11837118
This but also Earth.

>>11837099
Uh, fucking yeah, where do you think the propellant factory gets it from? What I meant was, the propellant factory is going to be acquiring literally dozens of tons of filtered liquid carbon dioxide from the Martian atmosphere daily, so borrowing a little spritz of CO2 from that system to help feed the plants is not a problem. You can't just open a window on Mars lol. You need to use a compressor to bring it inside, preferably one that compresses it all the way down to liquid while pulling it through a washable HEPA filter on the way, so you don't have your CO2 supply mixed with any dirt or nitrogen/argon.

>>11837116
You also gotta bring it up from 0.6% of an atmosphere to whatever pressure your habitat has inside.
>>11837126
Yes, I agree.

1 atm pure oxygen mars habitats when?

>>11837143
Spontaneously combusting habitats when?

>>11837128
>so you don't have your CO2 supply mixed with any dirt
mmm, perchlorates

>>11837118
So you’re saying hormonal birth control violates the NAP? Hmm.

>>11837144
but breathing pure oxygen feels fucking good bro

>>11837143
Alrightee just gonna flip this light switch here- AAAAAAAND it’s gone. All of it, it’s gone. The whole dome combusted.

>>11837147
Yes. It's the truth behind the gay frogs Alex Jones meme.

>>11837145
Perchlorates are easy to destroy.

>>11837147
Yes.

>>11836975
>what if the 14 year old consents

If you had raised a daughter you would know that 14 is pretty much peak female intellectual capability until they start hitting 70 and become based hag grandma's. The difference between a 14 and 18 year old is exactly fuck all.

>>11837153
I don't get this "reusable habitats" meme

>>11837143
I too would enjoy throwing another 10 kg bar of aluminum into the fireplace to help keep my Mars habitat nice and cozy through those long Martian winter nights.

>>11837190
>fireplace is an AlOx rocket
>chimney points down instead of up
>the thrust increases perceived gravity a bit to make it easier on the inhabitants

>>11837190
i will only become more powerful when my lungs are coated in pure sapphire

>>11837159
Run it through hydrogen gas and get a spicy beverage out of it

>>11837211
Wouldn't that just be hydrochloric acid?

>>11837128
Or you could just get an electrostatic filter and a pressure swing absorption concentrator for CO2
No liquid necessary

>>11837215
Hydroperchloric acid

Holy shit could Starship technically go grab hubble and bring it back to Earth for a museum? Also now that I think about it does SS give us a theoretical repair mission for Webb should something go wrong?

>>11837229
>Also now that I think about it does SS give us a theoretical repair mission for Webb should something go wrong?

Can't repair it if it explodes on the pad