/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11846440
First for flying rover tanks

>>11846440
Is it better to colonize the Moon or Mars first? Mars unironically takes less Delta-V to reach, but has long travel times. Then again 90% of your trips there are gonna be pure cargo launches. It’s also just a better spot than the moon too.

>>11846440
That's a big kerbal.

Real mars hours

>>11846453
You just answered your own question
Mars also has plentiful metal ores for construction, the moon doesn’t have much of anything to make it economical to colonize

>>11846440
I always saw the “big three” (and Val) as being the ultimate chads of KSP, and all the other kerbals are just nerdy engineers.

>>11846453
think if we get a moonbase that can start synthesizing fuel we could make much larger cargo transports to mars

>>11846453
>>11846459
The moon has much to teach us and it's always there.

>>11846451
God I hope a next Mass Effect will feature a flyable Kodiak and vietnam style doorguns if they'll dare to touch the IP ever again.

>>11846453
Good question. The moon, 100%. If something goes wrong help is 3 days away. Not to mention the lack of transfer windows means continual ability to rotate crew and replenish resources. While you build out the moon start sending starships to mars.

>>11846453
Simultaneous is the correct answer. With launch windows every couple of years there's no reason not to launch to the moon in the interim period. The moon is also a good place to test out Mars-destined equipment due to fast feedback and a fair amount of shared design challenges.

>>11846453
I think the moon is a better first destination than Mars.
>tips to either take about the same Delta-V
>trips to the moon are shorter even when chemical engines are used
>windows for lunar trips are monthly at worst
>the moon is easier to land on
>communication to and from Earth are much more responsive
Overall it's easier to establish a first base on the moon rather than Mars because of the above reasons, but really I don't care who goes where first. I'm happy that someone is seriously considering to go somewhere in space with serious business in mind. I'm not one of those wackos who think that all space activity must perfectly fit my imagined plans.

>>11846453
do you need to colonize moon to industrialize it?
launching mined resources from the moon is easier and great for supporting large scale orbital industry

>>11846471
I always thought that the moon may be an airless world, but it has (just) enough resources that we could make colonies there.

Like Mars is better but in a dire situation we could get a hundred or maybe two or three hundred people Living at the Lunar pole if we want some sort of safe drive against excitnction.

Also I always thought the idea of having a permanent void in the sky as being Kino.

>>11846467
God I hope Bioware never makes another Ass Effect ever again.

>>11846454
replace the soldiers with the ninjas

>>11846487
KAGUYA found a hell of a lot more carbon emanating from the moon than can be accounted for from micrometeorites and solar winds. Combined with water ice, the possibility of a full fuel ISRU setup is there, should we ever study and find it.

>>11846487
If nothing else, the moon could never operate independently due to a lack of key resources for biology. Besides which, that small of a population would lack long term viability. It's still okay for a base but there's a reason Musk chose Mars as the 'second home of humanity' destination.

>>11846509

>>11846505
Very mature...

>>11846544
Where do you think you are?

>>11846453
Luna makes more sense than Mars for the first colony.
>(near) real time communication
>if shit goes wrong, you don't need to wait for a launch window to evacuate
>if something breaks, we can send up spares at a reasonable timescale
>we can try out several different new systems for enviromental controll and food supply there
>we can test out different habitats there
>Helium 3 mining could be investigated
>further studies of lunar regolith and possible mining of other materials as well as shipbuilding capabilities could be investigated

So as a test for our first space colony on the surface of a planet or moon, I'd say Luna has quite some advantages over Mars, but mostly as a testbed for Mars.

>>11846453
why not both together

If you can change or add something to the Solar system to make it more interesting to explore, then what would it be? Ignoring any possible implications about the change not allowing for intelligent life develop on Earth.

Having a Chthonian planet would seem pretty cool, or maybe a binary planet of some kind.

>>11846551
sfg, you know... where the cautiously optimistic spectrum of autism prevails, not b where we use potty language and communicate like tards.

>>11846459
the moon has large rare earth metal deposits i thought

>>11846616
maybe just a star orbiting Sol out in the oort cloud. Something that makes interstellar travel less insane, on the order of a decade instead of hundreds of years.

>>11846616
mars has a magnetosphere, and a thicker atmosphere and is slightly warmer as a result. no living in tubes to escape the radiation, possibly able to go outside just with breathing apparatus not full pressure suits. may be running surface water at the equator.

>>11846616
>If you can change or add something to the Solar system to make it more interesting to explore, then what would it be?
A second Earth.

>>11846440
>kerbal space program shows you literally the tradeoffs between power and weight in rocket design
>infographic artist takes that and contorts it into a retarded metaphorical explanation anyway

>>11846616
make mars, venus, and earth all be habitable, add more titan like moons in the outer planets

it's elon birthday today.

>>11846655
I don't give a fuck.

>>11846645
first dumb question of the thread. do we have any idea of there being non frozen aquifers anywhere on mars? is it even possible/speculated?

>>11846630
Lurk moar.

>>11846661
yes, there is strong evidence of existing deep groundwater on Mars

>>11846672
Yeah, weren’t there some images released a few years ago of what’s believed to be liquid water flow coming down a crater rim?

>>11846661
Yes, wich is one of the reasons Mars is so interesting.
A few others are:
>near 24h days
>a shitload of iron ore
>carbon dioxide athmosphere (can be broken down into carbon and oxygen)
>cold, but not too cold to deal with it
>reasonably close to earth
>most suitable climate for a planet in our solar system to host a colony
>solar power is reasonably useable there
>lower gravity than earth, but possibly still strong enough for long therm human population (yet to be researched)

Is anyone else irritated with our whole “search for life on Mars?”. It’s like every mission we send finds evidence of water and organic chemicals and NASA always make a statement of

>”Yeah so we found evidence of previous water and organic chemicals and methane but no life. But trust me we’re close”

It feels like we’ve been (this) close to finding life on Mars since 2005. But still, none. But we’re always told that we’re (super close).

>>11846706
aquifers existing are more interesting for isru, just dig a borehole and pump it out. also cavern lakes you could build underground settlements around (strong maybe).

>>11846706
Probably to protect future funding opportunities.

>>11846706
As long as they keep sending these shit rovers that keep breaking their drills and so on, they'll always be "super close" to finding real scientific data.

>>11846456
Are there plants (algae, etc) that will survive under simulated martian conditions? Imagine just shipping a ton of them into that planet and waiting 1000 years

>>11846716
>ywn be the underground harbormaster of a vast martian lake deep under the surface with canals connecting other pockets with habitats

>>11846720
An astronaut with a shovel can do more in an hour than any space mission we’ve sent.

And that’s also true from a literal standpoint, as none of our probes have studied the surface of Mars below like three or four inches.

>>11846722
>waiting 1000 years
Fuck you, I don't have 1000 years.

>>11846729
Yes, that is a point I'm very fond of too. I'm tired of these god damn rovers that trickle back a tiny little bit of information every now and then but nothing solid.

>>11846699
A lot of the problems with zero gravity seem to be unique to zero gravity, such as fluids building up in certain parts of the brain. I wonder if all the body needs is just a tiny amount of gravity for reference.

>>11846728
>ywn never take your martian gf on a boat cruise around the local underground beauty spots, strings of lights of shoreside bars and restaurants illuminating the cavern walls as you sail

>>11846745
Imagine the comfort.

>meanwhile on the surface in buttplugsville

>>11846722
the problem is that literally all complex life is reliant on the easily accessible energy of a high oxygen content. If there's not enough oxygen then the only organisms that can exist are extremely low complexity microorganisms. There just isn't enough untapped energy within the Martian ecosystem to support complex life and the lack of tectonic activity means that there's no cyclical processes to periodically refresh the mineral content that enables anaerobic organisms to continue living so it's entirely possible that there's simply no possibility of introducing anything that could ever adapt to the environement.

>>11846706
The issue is the following:
We allways found compounds generaly associated with life.
However we have yet to find life itself.
Unrelated to that, there most likely is or has been life there, as out probes we sent there are most likely not perfectly sterile.

>>11846741
Indeed.
The real question isn't
>Can a human live normaly in low gravity
But
>How much gravity is required for a human to live normaly.
I wouldn't be surprised if lunar gravity was sufficient to reduce adverse effects sufficiently for long therm habitation.
However it's realy hard to research that as the only way of exposing a human to lower than earths gravity is to send them into space.
Either into a rotating space station or to a place with that gravity.

The moon would be ideal for that as it is simple to build up a supply line to it untill we can archive sufficient self-sustainability for longer times without supply missions.
And we don't have to fear the astronauts death if that doesn't work out as they don't need a special launch window to get home to earth from the moon.
They can get home anytime they want without major differences in DeltaV requirements.

>>11846666
mature...

>>11846798
Yeah, you really need to lurk the fuck moar if you think this place is mature.
And cut the fucking ellipsis, you're sticking out like a sore thumb.

>>11846766
How can that problem be circumvented?

>>11846802
Pretty sure he's doing it on purpose to be a fag.
Why, that's anyone's guess.

Starlink launch delayed :(

>>11846666
waste of quads punishable by airlock

>>11846821
With a slow board like this, who fucking cares. Go count your digits elsewhere.

>>11846810
it can't really. Mars is well along its way to complete sterilization, if not already there. In order to make Mars hospitable you must: restart tectonic activity, make an artificial magnetosphere, create plates, cover the surface with water, introduce cyanobacteria and wait a few million years. OR genetically engineer a magic plant that produced energy differently from resources that are abundant on the surface (likely impossible). If you don't want to do all that, you have to just accept that you need enclosed areas that replicate Earth conditions.

>>11846819
Again? C'mon Elon where's that cloud-obliterating superweapon already.

>>11846792
To go a little further, a few other questions are:
>Do we realy need 1013 hPa of 80% nitrogen and 20% oxygen athmosphere?
>What could we reasonably breathe for extended periods of time?
I'm pretty damn sure we could go much lower on pressure, higher on oxygen and replace the nitrogen with a noble gas or some other gas that doesn't realy react much with oxygen and isn't unhealthy to humans.
A more reasonable athmosphere for space colonies would probably be:
>50% oxygen
>50% helium/other inert gas
>300-400 hPa pressure
Or something like that.
Nitrogen is actualy quite hard to get in most places, meanwhile helium could potentialy be scooped up from gas giants alongside with hydrogen and helium 3.

>>11846836
>OR genetically engineer a magic plant that produced energy differently from resources that are abundant on the surface (likely impossible
That's better than "can't be done"

>If you don't want to do all that, you have to just accept that you need enclosed areas that replicate Earth conditions.
Definitely a start

>>11846852
>That's better than "can't be done"
it's well outside modern technology and probably only possible with a "gray goo" type organism which would be highly problematic for a lot of reasons

>>11846828
sounds like you're dodging the subject, I'm done here, talking to a person who comes up with "ass effect" is a waste of time. There's nothing I cold say that wasn't obvious to anybody but you.

absolute unit

>>11846859
>I'm done here
Bye now.

>>11846859

>>11846792
Hopefully 1/10th gravity is enough.

>>11846858
>only possible with a "gray goo" type organism which would be highly problematic for a lot of reasons
Which is why I said algae. Imagine a closed pod that will take in martian atmosphere and release oxygen from time to time. It's seeded with algae and sewage from earth for nitrogen. You just leave it there and forget about it. Start by sending one pod, then 2, then 4, then 8, 16, 32, 64 and eventually martian atmosphere will be full of oxygen and the pods will be opened, once they're opened the algae can colonize the martian surface

>>11846863
>>11846869
timestamps confirm samefag lol

>>11846893

>>11846861
>not Gigaship

>>11846845
Also interesting are the ethics of "Jelly Babies". I don't mean people born on Mars or the Moon, but like on asteroids or in microgravity.

Would Titan produce Jelly babies? The moons of Jupiter? Triton?

Also ethically is it wrong to have children in microgravity? I mean you're confining them to a life of never landing on a high gravity world.

Also that makes interplanetary war fun. No matter how BTFO Earth's fleet gets, the Titan Defense Navy will never be able to land on the planet, so Earth Resistance just swats the ships out of the sky from the surface.

>>11846895
If you keep replying he's just going to keep trying to save face.

>>11846895
>>11846904
samefagging samefag is obvious lol

Just fuck off back to /v/ where you belong. These posts will be deleted soon enough anyway.

>>11846819
Starlink is a threat to not only astronomy but also to space flight. AMERICAN space flight especially. SpaceX, this FOREIGN company must be stopped through immediate and thorough NATIONALIZATION before they commit the most unholy act of building, and SLS (pbui) forgive me for saying this, PROPELLANT D*P*TS.

>>11846836
Not him, but do we realy need to match earth that closely?
The radiation isn't that much of an issue if you don't go outside much and live underground.
Almost half the time you're sleeping anyway and if you mainly work and travel underground, you're not realy exposed to much radiation there.
The athmosphere only needs a partial oxygen pressure of about 100 hPa for a human to live there.
Not the entire soil of Mars has to sustain plants, only a few fields.
Fertilizer could reasonably be used.
The athmosphere could be filled up by inert gasses other than nitrogen to some degree to raise the temperature and pressure to at least 200 hPa and just above freezing temperatures for most of the year around the equator.
The high initial content of CO2 would certainly help the plants to grow and produce oxygen.

However all that is far future stuff, at first quite a few self-sustaining colonies have to be established there to build the foundation for a somewhat independent martian economy as well as trading with earth for stuff they can't produce themselfes at reasonable prices.
I could reasonably see Mars to get the shipyard of the solar system and trading in these ships for electronics and fertilizer as an example.

>>11846916

>IN THE YEAR 2125 THE MIGHT SLS PROGRAM WILL STILL EXIST AND EM-1 WILL NOW ONLY BE TWO MONTHS AWAY.

>FOREIGN AND PATHETIC SPACEX WILL NOT EVEN BE OPERATING IN THE INNER SOLAR SYSTEM ANYMORE HAHA WHAT LOSERS

>>11846916
You definitely need more ELON.

>>11846887
That would be nice as it would mean Jupiters moons could get colonized below their surface and rotating habitats would be a lot more viable at 300 hPa and 1m/s2 than at 1000 hPa and 10 m/s2.
>>11846903
>Would Titan produce Jelly babies? The moons of Jupiter? Triton?
We can't be certain, also it is questionable at what point one considers a human to be "jellified".
>Also ethically is it wrong to have children in microgravity? I mean you're confining them to a life of never landing on a high gravity world.
We can't tell for certain if it would happen to a degree high enough to matter or even be permanent on young adults.
Allthough I wouldn't call it unethical since as of now humans are pretty much confined to earth as well.
>Also that makes interplanetary war fun. No matter how BTFO Earth's fleet gets, the Titan Defense Navy will never be able to land on the planet
I wouldn't even be sure about that as one could use rotating habitats at nearly 10 m/s2 to raise and train a soldier-class.

However Earth would also be fuced as everything we launch needs to fight our gravity well while everyone else could go Zeon on us.
But they wouldn't be limited to one space colony/asteroid at the time, they could turn earth into a red glowing wasteland.

>>11846903
>>11846952
Keep in mind titan and the galilean moons all have gravity very similar to the moon. I doubt they would produce jelly babies. However, the real question would be places like the larger moons of uranus and neptune, the smaller moons of saturn, ceres, pluto, etc. Objects that are large enough to be spherical but still have quite a bit less gravity then the moon. The good thing about those objects though is you could make rotating dish habitats to simulate 1g.

>>11846967
>The good thing about those objects though is you could make rotating dish habitats to simulate 1g.
Forgot to mention, you might not even need to simulate 1g.

>>11846967
>thinking low gravity won't produce jelly babies

>>11846810
Genetically engineering more resilient organisms.
>>11846730
It will likely take even longer than that, sadly.

>>11846969
And also, io actually has a surface gravity about 1/5th of earth's gravity, which is even higher then the moon. Of course io has the radiation and volcanology issues, but I still think eventually we will find a way to deal with the radiation.

>>11846969
>>11846967
If you're trying to simulate Lunar gravity, you just need a centrifuge 9 meters across and spinning at 5.5 RPM (within the "nausea limit").

I mean how hard could it be to have a small habitat orbiting say ceres specifically for pregnant women. It just has to be as wide as Starship

Just how thin is a 0.006atm atmosphere? I just saw a youtube video of a guy who had a glass vacuum chamber. He pulled a vacuum as far as it would go, and said it was only slightly less than what you would experience on Mars. Really put it into perspective

>>11846976
>Being triggered by the fact that people who don’t grow up on Earth will simply look different

Get over it.

>>11846861
It won‘t be any higher, how often do we need to go through this?

>>11846916
D
E
P
O
T
S

>>11846983
pretty thin compared to earth
pretty thick compared to vacuum

>>11846986
There's still no evidence that reproduction will work in low gravity conditions.
>muh evolution
that's not how evolution works and you know it. those people are likely to have chronic health problems regardless of what your sci fi movies told you

>>11846992
Only one way to find out.

>>11846988
THICC

>>11846976
Put pregnant women and children in rotating dish habitats then. Or have most people live in dish habitats.

>>11846992
>There's still no evidence that reproduction will work in low gravity conditions.

Reproduction has been observed in vertebrates living in zero gravity already.

> those people are likely to have chronic health problems

Prove it.

>>11846981
What if you simply charged your body with say 15kv and the ship with -15kv and had a dielectric barrier in between? Electrostatic gravity

>>11846981
You can simulate gravity on the surface of moons through a sort of rotating dish.

>>11846999
>nooooo don’t adapt to living on another world. Artificially induce earth gravity for no reason nooooo

>>11846999
it's not much of a problem in the long run anyway. just means limited time will be spend on surfaces possibly for mining and scientific purposes, most of everyone else will live in spinning habs in orbit. like fifo but you deorbit to go to work.

>>11847007
That is if children born in low gravity end up with chronic health problems.

>>11846992
>There's still no evidence that reproduction will work in low gravity conditions.
There's also no evidence that it won't or any good reason to believe it won't.

>>11846967
>>11846969
>>11846976
There has been just about ZERO actual reasearch into that, allnwe have now is an educated guess at best.
We have no fucking idea, we only know what happens to over 30 year olds in zero gravity over the course of a dozend or so months.
We have no idea about anything other than 9,81 m/s2 and 0 m/s2.
For all we know 1 m/s2 with some training could be sufficient or 8 m/s2 could be insufficient for whatever reason.
It's still a question:
>if jelly-babies are an actual problem
>if certain high-impact exercise limits the possible effects of low gravity
>how low gravity has to be foe noteable adverse effects
>how much of a percentage of a given day/week/month of high gravity would reduce the adverse effects to a tolerable level

To research that we need a moon/mars base or a rotating habitat and people living there for years.

>>11847010
>most of everyone else will live in spinning habs in orbit.
why if you can put humans on surface rotating habitats

>>11846995
you're right. we've got to try

>>11847013
>If

It would be relatively trivial to inseminate and bring pregnant rats to term in LEO, and study the resulting pups for health abnormalities. We’ve already exposed pregnant rats to micro-g and the only difference in the pups after they were born was a worse sense of balance, which was corrected after they had lived on earth for a few days.

>>11847022
>There has been just about ZERO actual reasearch into that

Not true. We’ve exposed pregnant rats to micro-g and also had female frogs lay frog eggs, then had the eggs fertilized and develop into tadpoles in micro-g.

>>11847025
links?

>>11847013
>chronic health problems
If they return to earth, quite likely. Stay in their gravity? Doubt it.
This is shit we're gonna have to figure out anyways and not something we can fucking postulate about.

>>11847023
or that. any concept art for them?

>>11847028
So were they swimming in a floating sphere of water?

>>11847034
https://youtu.be/LqoYtBZAKO0?t=176 no but isaac arthur explains it here

>>11847023
>why if you can put humans on surface rotating habitats
Or... just make use oF SIMULTANEOUSLY CO_ADVANCING TECHNOLOGIES LIKE GENETICS OR ROBO BODY REPLACEMENTS:::

>>11847030
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2610337/

Lacking a “down” direction seemed to fuck with the relevant body systems, but it’s worth noting that people and animals living on, say, the moon would actually have a “down”, so it’s possible no such abnormalities would appear at all, and would most likely be less severe.

>you're too stupid to be of any value in getting humans off this rock

>>11847036
They used four African clawed frog females and got them to lay eggs by injecting them with the relevant hormone, then mixed the eggs with sperm in a “container filled with water”. The eggs developed into tadpoles which then swam around in the container. This was performed in Space Shuttle Endeavor in September of 1992. When they brought them back on earth, the tadpoles developed into frogs with a normal sense of balance.

>>11847060
Mars will need plumbers too.

>>11847065
Hardly an extensive experiment in how microgravity affects our offspring.

>>11847022
Based rational anon. the other guys who swear up and down that humans will be fine reproducing in <1g (with literally no evidence either way) are just butthurt at the thought that colonization might be thwarted by this. We still have rotating habitats worst case scenario

>>11847072
Sure, but the process of embryogenesis is apparently achievable in micro-g. Long-term experiments with rats or mice would be ideal but we haven’t done anything with them recently that I’m aware of except for the genetically engineered chad mice they launched last year. Should be something done in the near future

>>11847082
We need actual fucking bases set up. Not just a fartbox in LEO.

>>11847081
Prove colonization will be thwarted by it. Can’t, so hush.

>>11847066
>tfw too stupid to be a plumber

>>11847086
If they can do it in micro-g, then they could totally do it on the moon or Mars. It’s significantly cheaper to put stuff in LEO than on the lunar surface but I suppose experiments will probably be performed there too.

>>11847072
We shouldn't be bothering with microgravity anyway. As >>11847057 points out, the developmental problems (and problems for adults as well) come from the lack of a 'down' direction which the body has no way to compensate for. Thinking that freefall is a relevant testing environment for even the Moon is absolutely smallbrain behavior on either side.

>>11847089
someones gotta keep the pisslocks full

>>11847066

>>11847101
Yeah I got in an argument about this with some anons some time back and they changed my mind. Conception and birth in orbit might very well fuck up an embryo, but we simply have no data on GRAVITATIONAL birth besides 1g. It might very well be that healthy babies can grow as long as there is SOME gravity. The Moon would be a good way to test this. There probably exists some “minimum” gravity where babies will be fine, we just don’t know what it is

>>11847101
Well, yes. I would prefer actual ground testing. But I don't see any actual moon or mars bases on the drawing board set in stone.
All I see is vague promises about a diet ISS in cislunar orbit and a vague promise of a manned Mars swing-by some time in the 2030s.

>>11847113
>Conception and birth in orbit might very well fuck up an embryo

Works just fine for frogs, but perhaps not for mammals, because mammals have to implant on the interior wall of the womb. Why hasn’t this been tested yet? Seems like a simple and useful line of experiment.

imagine the smell

>>11847113
I prefer 2g for STRONK baby
3g and you get pancake babies instead of jelly

>>11847124
Delivering a dead baby would be quite traumatic, and wouldn’t look good for optics. Not to mention the fact that it might put the female astronaut at a huge risk. Idk maybe we can throw some shady money to the Chinese and have them test it on their upcoming space station

>>11847131
3g pancake babies lmao

>>11847134
>"Hey China want a couple million dollars? Just get a woman pregnant in LEO and have her carry the baby to term."
>Baby is born dead/horribly deformed
>China destroys station, vows to never return to space
>American empire established across the solar system
>Little do the Chinese know that the food supply on the station was tainted

>>11847134
>Delivering a dead baby would be quite traumatic, and wouldn’t look good for optics

I meant with rats. Rats are smaller than humans but placental mammals like us that undergo macroscopically identical embryonic development. Assuming they’re brought to term, we can study the development and behavior of the pups and monitor their biometrics for any significant abnormalities that could reduce quality of life. Rats usually only live three years so it wouldn’t be particularly time consuming.

>>11847141
Oh man, anyone else seen that Steve1989 video where he eats that disgusting PLA Chinese MRE? Their food is so gross; just food poisoning in a bag

>>11847028
>micro G levels
That's generaly meaning less than 1 m/s2 if I remember correctly, wich means it says next to nothing for us.
>>11847065
>frogs
Good for memes, not so good for comparisson to humans.
>>11847081
Sure, the question is just how low we can go.
To answer it, we must send up humans and find out.
We don't even need them to suffer the full adverse effects to know.
Keeping them up for 2-10 years would probably be sufficient.
If it is too bad, we can probably tell before it hits them too bad to return to earth.
At a later point, or even during thag experiment, we could try reproduction.
>>11847087
We need to do the research.
There is only one way to realy find out and we didn't realy research it so far.
Otherwise we can't realy know anything about it.

>>11847087
you have no reason to believe it won't be. this won't change no matter how hard you deny it

>>11847156
Shit, I'll take our old dead man in a can, expired 20 years ago over that shit any day.
Hell, I got so used to it back during my service that I'll have some of the civilian version every now and then.

>>11847161
>you have no reason to believe it won't be

Existing experimental data suggests it won’t be.

>>11847141
>Just get a woman pregnant in LEO and have her carry the baby to term."
Sounds like the very dark version of KSP

>>11847156
The one with the green pork? Yeah that looked absolutely inedible. The more recent PLA one he did looked better but I still wouldn't.

>>11847169
Yeah that’s the one hahah. The noodles were green and the pork was vomit colored. Surely the food they bring to space is better, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it got all the astronauts sick...
Link for anyone who’s interested:
https://youtu.be/n96m5lB8nzA

why did russians never take the hydrolox pill besides the RD-0120 for energia and RD-0146, both of which have never really been used

>>11846616
Mars would be twice as large so it has enough mass to initiate plate tectonics and have a proper magnetosphere. 66-PSYCHE would also be a complete planet.

>>11846763
>implying they wouldn't have gotten fried by the raw power of the sun

>>11847184
Because their space program after the fall of the Soviet Union consisted of making money off the Americans and not spreading the pork around for re-electing politicians.
They had Soyuz for crew which was RP-1 and Proton for heavy loads which was UDMH.
The Americans had a lot of time and money invested hydrolox on the other hand.

>>11847184
More energy per weight in kerosene. It's like how you'd expect an hydrogen-oxygen torch to be ultra-hot, but oxy-acetylene is much hotter.

>>11846616
Earth's moon is like mars but with plate tectonics

What body in the solar system is best suited for a permanent human base?

>>11847191
Can’t here you ugly falmer from all the birds chirping and moose calling underneath my aerogel/polymer dome

>>11847235
INCELADUS

>>11847235
All of them

>>11847235
Yes.

>>11847235
oh no, you fell for the aussie /pol/ shitposter
but in all honesty, titan

>>11847246
That's the spirit. Occupy everything.

>>11847240
How much do we really know about Enchilada?
What makes it preferable to anything else? Like Titan?
>>11847246
Obviously, but I meant in my lifetime.
>>11847252
I think he's moved on to Mercury now:
>>11843870 >>11843873

Why Titan?

>>11846453
Mars.

>>11847246
>All of them

For New Rhodesia! This one shall not fall into the realms of chaos!

>>11847265
Encephalitis has salty oceans with easy access (giant vents). Titan is cooler, but Inceladus will most likely be more convenient to colonize due to the lack of a giant blanket of near-cryogenic nitrogen.

>>11847265
It has a thick atmosphere, decent gravity, subsurface ocean, large access to hydrocarbons for free rocket fuel, protected by a strong magnetosphere, and it is fucking cool, you can literally fly there with just wings. The biggest problem would be heavy elements (ie non-volatiles), but you could probably harvest those from the planet's silicate core.
Also, yeah, he is making mercury threads on pol now too.
>>>/pol/264884802

Lower elevations can cut the radiation flux from GCR in half,which is very good even if you're committed to underground shelters since it means people can be out and about with greatly reduced radiation burden. The northern transitional region of mars seems ideal for colonization,given its abundant ice,metals,and low elevation.

>>11847235
My dream is terraforming Ganymede. You'd need orbital mirrors and remove most of the ocean, but after it's done you have the most viable natural body of the outer system.

>>11847104
кeк

>>11846616
For a minimal change, a Phobos-like satellite for the Earth would be pretty nice.
But yeah, as other said, another Earth-like planet would be great too

>>11846616
The Great Red Spot periodically fires gamma rays.

>>11847310
bro
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrestrial_gamma-ray_flash

>>11847265
did you see the 10000 word document he wrote on strontium-90 supersoldiers?

Say Mars gets full on cities and can economically sustain itself and grow
What great wonder building would you want them to build, and what would it do?

The Biodrome
>A behemoth series of habitats connected and designed to let plant and animal life live and roam freely and safely
>Martians can swim with reef fish, climb a mountain with herds of goats and cave full of bats
>Wide plains allow herds of wildebeest while a hunt from a pack of wolves takes one down
>The structure safely maintains the conditions needed for a complex biosphere while recycling precious nutrients and allowing visitors unfettered views in safety with ultrasonic fences

>>11847287
>it cuts it in half SEE
... When compared to the largest surface concentrations outside of the top of Mars' megavolcanoes to the absolute minimum found high on the poles, where solar power will be cut drastically. When you look the more equatorial region you'll find that there is actually two large light blue regions with both low relative cosmic ray dose and high solar energy availability. This also coincides with likely SpaceX landing candidates.

>>11847316
oh lawdy

>>11847323
https://pastebin.com/1yqZ5THg

>>11847321
Space elevator. Possible on Mars even without assuming futuristic materials.

>>11847274
>>11847286
So it seems like Saturn's moons are the most ideal.
But how much do we actually know about the outer planets? I know we have Dragonfly in the works, but what else?
And how do we encourage future development; how do we get some billionaire to help?
>Also, yeah, he is making mercury threads on pol now too.
Absolutely based.
>>11847288
>remove most of the ocean,
I can't support something like this.
>>11847316
>>11847326
Is he schizophrenic, actually smart, or just a master shitposter?

>>11847321
Zion from the Matrix films, only several of them interconnected by subways and surface roads as well.

>>11847322
solar energy is still available in the northern transition region year round-unlike the earth,mars has almost no axial tilt,so it doesn't have anywhere near the polar region fuckery we have.

If I got absolutely horrendous grades on my undergrad, but I got a 3.5 GPA on my graduate degree, would I ever stand a chance at a PhD?

>>11847332
Actually, it is titan, then the outer two Galilean moons of jupiter, then everywhere else

>>11847332
For the outer planets, we really need a probe carrier ship that can get into orbit, record data from lander probes and tight beam it back to earth, really

>>11847332
he is a mix of the three

>>11847340
Poles gonna pole, it will still require much more surface area to attain the same power. The penalty of digging up 40% more overlay material is not comparable.

>>11847346
>tight beam
Is this a thing? Or just something from sci-fi?
>>11847343
We don't actually have all the moons of Saturn and Jupiter mapped, right?
So is it possible that there's another that is even more suited for human visitation? Or has our observation ruled that out?

>>11847367
our observation has pretty much ruled that out, unless we have a way to easily generate thick atmospheres on the larger moons of the gas giants, titan is probably one of the best. i'd like to see the icey moons all get thick enough atmospheres to generate seas of volatiles like on titan, but who knows

>>11847367
Tight beam is another word for laser communication

>>11847385
Right, but I thought it was limited to sci-fi.
At least practically.
>>11847384
>our observation has pretty much ruled that out,
Well, shit.

>>11847392
>Right, but I thought it was limited to sci-fi.
Not realy, it's just not yet used at a large scale and requires pretty precise aim.
>At least practically.
IIRC Starlink satellites have laser communication systems onboard vor satellite to satellite communication.
A practical issue is that it doesn't work in an athmosphere.

>>11847003
Adhesion, static or otherwise, isn't gravity, it wouldn't be any better than tying you down. You need gravity effects on the internal organs and probably even on individual cells.

>>11847340
oh fuck me dead i am retarded,mars has MORE axial tilt than earth. being a brainlet is suffering.

>>11847448
If you wanted to change the axial tilt, how could it be achieved?

At what point do you think reusable rockets would have become technologically feasible if someone actually gave a shit to develop them before musky man?

>>11847459
Idk, maybe Energia/Zenit combo in the 90's

>>11847459
Around the 80s-90s

Not that much sooner. They need compact computing to be able to perform semi-autonomous landings and account for errors. I'm sure it could have been brute forced with a low success rate as early as the 70's though

>>11847332
>lands then takes off

Lol nasa

>>11847459
Retropropulsive landing has a hard technological limit due to the degree of quick, automated fine control. I don't see why someone couldn't have done something like electron decades in advance, though.

>>11847480
Isn't that good? It can HOPP and land as many times as it wants.

>>11847494
self-followup: something like electron in the sense of a small launcher with the weirdo parachute landing. Obviously not electron itself because of high power lithium battery dependence.

>>11847476
Put a pilot in the first stage who’s job is to manually guide it into a fresh water lake near the launch site
Final deceleration by secondary engines
You could do that in the 60s

Touch down on a small pad is not necessary

>>11847459
Mid 80's I'd say, the Harrier hit service in '69 after first being introduced in '67 so the avionic software to get an aerodynamically unstable vehicle to balance itself using vectored thrust was there. In some ways rockets are actually easier because you don't have to worry about hot exhaust ingestion which plagued the Harrier and was the primary reason it was notorious for stalling and slamjamming it's pilots in the last stage of landing.

>>11847504
Touch down on a small pad is necessary for a reusable launch vehicle to have an economically viable concept of operations. It's not enough to recover the rocket; inspection and refurbishment man hours need to be eliminated.

>>11847494
This anon is right. The 90's had the ingredients for it but it probably would have been much harder before the 2000's

>>11847504
based and bachempilled

>>11847535
Touchdown on a hard surface without modern shocks and precise controls will cause structural damage to the rocket
Better to land in clean water, get your crew of Mexicans to scrub it, then reuse

>>11847497
>>11847480
>>11847332
they depicted titan as kinda like mars but in reality it is actually quite different. can't wait to see the pictures dragonfly takes

>>11847459
Depends on how it's done and at what point one considers them reuseable.
A rocketplane made from Inconel that enters a suborbital trajectory, releases an expendable upper stage with a capsule and lands somewhere downrange would have been reasonably possible in the 1970s to 1980s.

For an ISS orbit it could have started in KSC, deployed the upper stage over the atlantic, coast a bit, kill some velocity with a short burn and landed in Köln Bonn airport in germany or somewhere else in europe.
From there it could have been refueled with just kerosene and flown back via turbofan/turbojet engines.

Technology wise that would have required:
>Inconel
Allready been used, tested and trusted for years.
>RP-1/LOX engine
Lots of them available, making one useable for several ignitions would hardly been a problem
>RCS controll of a fast suborbital spaceplane
X-15 showcased that.
In fact X-15 showed most of the required technologies at an earlier stage of development
>human pilots crazy enough to fly that thing
There is a reason the urination system from Apollo came in "large" "huge" and "enormous".
They wouldn't have chickened out of it and it wouldn't have been crazier than X-15 after all.

>>11847476
>They need compact computing to be able to perform semi-autonomous landings and account for errors.
Or a human pilot.

>>11847550
Shocks are not a particularly advanced technology. Precision avionics timing is not new or exotic, either. Cleaning out corrosive liquids and making sure your plumbing is devoid of water is labor intensive no matter what you do.

>>11847550
Or a giant airbag, no or minimal cleaning necessary.

>the world's largest POMF

>>11847581
>waah, what are we gonna do on orbit, onii-chan?

>>11847576
> Precision avionics timing is not new or exotic, either.
Everyone keeps saying this and yet SpaceX is the only one landing rockets. If it were so easy, anyone with relightable engines would trivially achieve retropropulsive reuse.

>>11847588
The barrier isn't technology, it's iteration speed and willingness to fail.

>>11847550
>Touchdown on a hard surface without modern shocks and precise controls will cause structural damage to the rocket
Every moon landing did exactly that.
Their "shockabsorbers" where simple metal profiles in a tube that got crushed.
Besides that, shockabsorbers haven't changed that much.
It's still a piston with holes in an oil filled cylinder.
Sometimes these holes have valves, in our case an overpressure valve to limit the force it can transmit.

Otherwise the early proposals of the shuttle programm had the right idea:
Just use another larger shuttle as a lower stage.

>>11847599
>Their "shockabsorbers" where simple metal profiles in a tube that got crushed.
Incidentally, Falcon also has this, the aluminum crush core in each leg for hard or uneven landings.

>>11847588
The issue with reusable rockets for decades is that the market volume for payloads is too low to make reusable rockets viable. On average, one company is going to get about 10 launches per year which is incredibly low compared to the dozens of launches that would make reusable rockets much more viable. During this time, it was easier and made more sense financially to stick with expendable rockets that can be tailored for each payload. SpaceX is the only one who broke out this "curse" because they made a cheap expendable rocket before making it reusable which is an approach no one thought was possible.

>>11847599
The shuttle was crippled by its massive unnecessary dry mass and didn’t even hold fuel
The idea that you can have a larger shuttle for the first stage is ludicrous

>>11847592
Indeed.
SpaceX isn't ashamed to fail.
Hell, they are kind of proud and made a video about all their failed landings untill they figured out how to land a booster.
Part of the reason NASA hired them for comercial cargo and crew was that NASA was terribly afraid of failiure while they where not.
Even now that F9 had a design freeze, SpaceX won't stop blowing up stuff, just that it's now stainless steel tanks filled with LNG and LOX.

>>11847620
>The idea that you can have a larger shuttle for the first stage is ludicrous
I disagree. The first stage shuttle wouldn't need any payload bays which would significantly decrease the relative dry mass required.

>>11847610
>The issue with reusable rockets for decades is that the market volume for payloads is too low to make reusable rockets viable.
While this is bullshit that oldspace believes to a degree, it is certainly bullshit. It's circular - an overpriced launch market has niche demand, therefore we can't make it any bigger because the existing niche demand can't make use of a greater, lower cost supply. The only way to change this situation is to actually make the damn rocket and keep going at it. Well, that or just say fuck it and utilize your excess capability to launch your own payloads like SpaceX.

>>11847431
Are you german? Just asking.

we will never "colonize" mars or the moon you stupid nerds l2economics

>>11847648
More importantly than that, its contractor workforce retention. If they are expected to optimize for a revenue profile, disruption is against their interest.

>>11847620
Don't think of it as that compronised as hell Shuttle we got.
In that case the orbiter would very much hold fuel in the section that has gotten the cargo bay and have had a smaller cargo bay as well as smaller wings.
It would have had vacuum optimized engines and wold be released at about 3 km/s in about 100 km altitude.
The orbiter itself would have required about 5 km/s of delta V, wich isn't that hard to archive with an ISP of about 450 s.

>>11847625
spacex subsists SOLELY on basedboy hype its a scam company

>>11847659
>>11847669
(You) are seen, the contract is fulfilled, return to the abyss until you are called again

>>11847625
>Even now that F9 had a design freeze, SpaceX won't stop blowing up stuff, just that it's now stainless steel tanks filled with LNG and LOX.
I like how Tory Bruno admitted "yeah LNG is a meme term for methane but it's designed to make it look good to investors."

>>11847669
That would be Mars One.

>>11847658
Yes, I am.
Why are you asking?
Is something wrong with my grammar or spelling?

>>11847648
I know about the circular issue, that is why the launch market was trapped in the state that it was for decades. Add on top of that general apathy by any potential source of funds (i.e. the government), and the standard that development must be expensive and time consuming will result in an industry that's resistant to change and growth. This wasn't the opinion of some old geezers who were afraid of anything different, this was something that seemed perfectly logical at the time. What SpaceX did was fairly radical compared to the industry environment when they started out. Which is why SpaceX's success was so shocking to many in the industry, and why some refuse to accept it.

>>11847066
Good plumbers are generally very smart

>>11847431
Laser coms absolutely work inside an atmosphere, the only testing so far has been laser orbit to surface coms
it doesn't shine for this purpose but it works

>>11847676
LNG is the standard therm used to describe liquified natural gas, no matter the industry.
Also it's shorter than "liquid methane", so why not use it?
>>11847669
>delivering cargo for years
>re-flying boosters for years
>launching sattelites for years
>building their own satellite network
>recently launching crew
>having contracts for future lunar landings
Sure, that's all hype and no real accomplishments...
F9 is here to stay, at least untill starship is operational.

>>11847692
just say methalox

>>11846722
i like to think there was a nearly identical post on space 4chan a few billion years ago

>>11847698
>Cyanobacteria's genome is full of ancient alien memes encoded in base-4

>>11847686
Ok, technicly it works as long as there are no clouds and not too much heat-distortion.
But practicly using conventional high gain antennas and conventional radio works far more reliable, making it pretty much useless here on earth except maybe for some nieche applications.

>>11846472
>>11846588
DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER

There's literally no reason why you wouldn't do both simultaneously. Mars takes longer to get to, but the Moon takes longer to do anything on because it has a harsher environment. The propulsion technology and vehicles that let you go to the Moon let you go to Mars anyway.

The only point I'll add is that going to the Moon doesn't directly help you get to Mars, as in it doesn't make trips easier. Going to the Moon simply gives you more experience operating on the surface of another world, and while conditions there are very different than on Mars the important thing is that it spurs the growth and development of new technology in the private sector for constructing vacuum-capable heavy machinery and vehicles, which can work on Mars if they can work on the Moon.

>>11847698
>4AYSS accidentally causes the oxygen catastrophy

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20170000667.pdf
holy shit this is some black magic

>>11847695
That's even more of a meme therm like keralox or hydrolox, but also acceptable like RP-1 or LH2.

>>11847459
80s
the dolphin sex space shuttle designs would absolutely have worked, although they would have been massive boondoggles the goal of total reuse/refurb would have been reached
wouldn't have had much useful payload though

>>11847659
We will colonize the entire universe stupid retard l2economics

>>11847692
LNG is a mixture of light gases, like 80% methane, it’s not LCH4

>>11847713
>"We need this for our rocket to send some tardigrades to space. Don't worry guys! It's just a highly reactive compound. It doesn't pose any risk to us anaerobic Cha-"
>oxygen tank breaks due to shitty Paleoproterozoic-Mexican welds
>4AYSS reaction when

>>11847679
Not really, your English is good. You just wrote 'vor' instead of 'for', so I took a guess. Happens to me too, sometimes I write 'd' instead of 'th', or the other way around.

>>11847714
What, surface tension? Capillary action?

>>11847718
*lewd dolphin noises*

>>11847726
Technicly correct, allthough pure liquified methane allso falls within the specifications of it.
But that's more a hairsplitting on definitions...

>>11847718
I am highly sceptical of these side mated non cylindrical space planes ability to reach the mass fraction necessary to achieve orbit

Even an optimized cylindrical two stage rocket only puts 4% payload in orbit

>>11847735
yes

>>11847731
That was probably auto-corretion of my keyboard app, I'm currently far from home and phoneposting.

>>11846616
A super-Earth/mini-Neptune of 5.5 Earth masses captured as a moon of Uranus; basically instead of a giant impact altering Uranus' axis of rotation back in the day, the impactor had a massive moon that struck Uranus and left this mini-Neptune captured in orbit.

Think Triton but on a much larger scale. This object becomes the most massive moon in the solar system and also the most massive moon in relation to its parent object in the solar system, beating out Pluto and Charon. Uranus' axial tilt gets increased by ten degrees in the initial impact and capture, but the big moon captures in a highly inclined orbit with a tilt of over 100 degrees to the ecliptic, and due to tidal forces after billions of years Uranus' axial tilt gets dragged over by a larger and larger angle as its giant moon's orbit first circularizes, then shrinks in terms of inclination and semimajor axis, until finally everything settles into a stable arrangement. What we see today is Uranus with an 83 degree axial tilt and its single giant moon orbiting prograde with an inclination of zero compared to Uranus' rotation in an almost completely circular orbit around the barycenter of the system. Uranus in this alternate world is tidally locked to its moon and vice versa.

>>11846699
Mars has about as much Iron as the Earth does, however the Earth has massive oceans to prevent the strongly red colored dust from just blowing around and around and covering everything like on Mars. Mars is almost completely red due to iron oxide, but that layer is only microns to millimeters thick in almost every location, except for the large deposits of exposed hematite and other iron ores that have been eroded for billions of years.

What Mars has in relative abundance compared to any other object apart from Earth is phosphorous, which will probably be the most valuable substance in the solar system once we really start raping up the rates of orbital habitat population growth.

>>11847745
It's less about fuel efficiency and more about not having to build that realy expensive non-fuel part for every launch.
And as a two-stage design, maybe even with droptanks, it's far from impossible.
Especialy with large a keralox lower stage shuttle and a small methalox/hydrolox upper stage shuttle.

Remember, a lot of design constraints of the shuttle focused on:
>Launching big ass KH-11 spy sattelites
>making absolutely sure to never have to land outside US or VERY close and better occupied allies like western germany
>recovering (or maybe stealing russian) spysats
NASA never realy needed that untill Hubble (modified KH-11 spysat) and ISS (near the end of the shuttle programm)

>>11847795
>raping up the rates of orbital habitat population growth.
I mean that's one way to do it I suppose

>>11847692
>>11847695
LCH4
And it matters if you super-chill it like SpaceX does. The heavier fractions would have higher boiling and freezing points. If the methane is near its freezing point, the heavier fractions could possibly ice out first and block flow. Just be glad it's not oxygen that's icing up.
>>11847795
>raping up the rates of orbital habitat population growth
lel

>>11846722
The big issue with surface life on Mars isn't the low pressure or even the low temperature, it's the very high levels of ultraviolet light irradiation on the surface.

Life existed on Earth for example for literally billions of years before even bacteria colonized the land, and it wasn't because the land was hot or dry because bacteria live in the hottest and driest places on Earth today. It was because for billions of years, Earth had no ozone layer, which meant anything exposed on the surface of the land or the water would have its DNA destroyed and its cellular chemistry disrupted in minutes or even seconds.

That being said, there are 100% bacteria and other simple organisms that could be transplanted into Martian soils a few meters underground that would survive if the right soil chemistry was present. In fact we've discovered an actual lake on Mars, not a dry lake bed but liquid water under the surface of the south polar ice cap, which would definitely be habitable for some Earth life so long as the water does not contain some kind of toxic chemicals.

>>11846741
>I wonder if all the body needs is just a tiny amount of gravity for reference
Almost certainly.

>we have to make sure mars has no life before we colonize it
>so we need to investigate thousands of potentially habitable areas over a period of decades to centuries
>muh planetary protection

fucks sakes this shit makes me livid

>>11847795
>phosphorous
Oh, it's starting to get pretty valuable even as of now.
The demand is high and the supply nearly exausted.
In addition to that the demand is climbing about proportional to the worlds population or faster.
>iron only dust on the surface
Sure, but that dust is pretty easy to reach. Meanwhile launching ships there is a lot easier than here as it requires less deltaV, thrust to weight ratio and you can start with pretty much vacuum optimized engines and their higher ISP.
Also maxQ is much lower, probably no need for fairings in most cases.

>>11847795
I'd point out that anything comparably accessible on Mars to Earth becomes disproportionately more accessible from the viewpoint of an interplanetary economy due to the smaller gravity well. Iron deposits with comparable accessibility on the surface becomes a disproportionate orbital supply.

>>11847819
>The big issue with surface life on Mars isn't the low pressure or even the low temperature, it's the very high levels of ultraviolet light irradiation on the surface.

UV is the easiest shit to block.

> Life existed on Earth for example for literally billions of years before even bacteria colonized the land, and it wasn't because the land was hot or dry because bacteria live in the hottest and driest places on Earth today. It was because for billions of years, Earth had no ozone layer, which meant anything exposed on the surface of the land or the water would have its DNA destroyed and its cellular chemistry disrupted in minutes or even seconds.

Life exists which does fine on the surface of simulated Martian environments.

>>11846983
Thick enough that you can scrub off 99.5% of your entry velocity using nothing but aerodynamics.

>>11847819
>The big issue with surface life on Mars isn't the low pressure or even the low temperature, it's the very high levels of ultraviolet light irradiation on the surface.
It's a combination, but it is mostly the low pressure. Bacteria can grow in Martian conditions if you increase the pressure.

Which is why I think we're very lucky Mars has such a thin atmosphere. If it didn't, it'd be crawling with garbage bacteria which would be completely meaningless except that governments would be bending over backwards because to stop expansion >>11847829 muh aboriginal martians

>>11847829
>Muh bacteria

Just kill it lol

>>11847829
>muh planetary protection
That argument should have been over with the first soft landing of a spacecraft as it almost certainly was contaminated with earthborn microbes.

What if find life on Mars but it ends up being annoying fucking mosquitos?

>>11847863
We kill it.

>>11847184
Everyone else is wrong, it's because the Soviet engineers knew that hydrolox was a meme.
Yes, they used it on Energia-Buran, but they were copying the Shuttle and they knew Shuttle itself was a meme, too.

>>11847863
>Olympus Mons turns out to be a large mosquito egg patch
>it was buried by the last civilization on Mars to protect the system from the bug swarm

>>11847863
At least that's impossible as the athmosphere is way too thin for that.
0,006 bar means about 0,006 times the lift or thrust of an aerodynamic device
There certainly is life on Mars, on our contaminated landers that is.

>>11847288
Ganymede is mostly water and if you removed enough that you could see land above the waves you'd have an object with less gravity than the Moon.

>>11847877
>There certainly is life on Mars, on our contaminated landers that is.
There is practically no chance there isn't also a microbial biosphere all over the subsurface and in all of the perchlorate puddles and shit. Don't let the planetary protection types know, though.

>>11847452
You need access to a trillion times more energy than humantity has used so far in its history, including biological metabolism, no matter what method you can think of.

>>11847896
Bruh, just invent sustainable fusion energy. It can fix literally every problem.

>>11847459
1990 at the latest, that's when the DC-X flew.

If you take DC-X, make it four times as large, add a payload bay, and put it on top of a second DC-X that uses methalox instead of hydrolox (so it masses more and has more thrust), you have a fully reusable two stage launch vehicle.

Never forget that we could have been where we are now 30 years ago.
Never forget that they took this from you.
Never forget that this was cancelled in favor of Venture Star because of favoritism despite the latter being a hot mess of technological shortfalls that everyone could see would never actually work.

>>11847908
>energy than humantity has used so far in its history, including biological metabolism
All of that has been powered by sustainable fusion energy
:^)

>>11847552
Titan is mostly covered in cold deserts, the only liquid methane exists at the poles, and Dragonfly will not be landing near the poles. Titan will appear very similar to Mars, except hazier.

>>11847917
lockheed making dc-x real when?

>>11847908
Why bother with that, just throw a really big rock really fast.

>>11847917
NASA's mishandling of that entire program and related ones was downright criminal.

>>11847931
Forgot webm.

>>11847940
SSTO will never be a thing but this beast was absolutely kino

>>11847917
>spend 6 years on a hopper with only two vehicles and no horizontal movement and no ability to turn it into a real orbital vehicle
>LH2 meme

It’s a typical government program, that’s for sure.

NASA no doubt killed it because of its possibility of success though

>>11847940
What the fuck have we been doing the last 30 years, they had a goddamned Starhopper back then and it didn't even look like a dinged up water tower.

>>11847953
Because the difficulty of a hopper is nothing
The difficulty is taking an actual launch vehicle and landing it after its boosted its payload downrange at 3 km/s

Strapping a buncha rl10s together and doing hops is easy
Nor does it lead to anything

>>11847953
Because after the very first failed hop the government instantaneously gave up on it.

>>11847953
It's a miracle they got this thing to fly with mexican tent welding technology

jesus christ trying to lift heavy things to orbit in real scale ksp is fucking hard
how does elon do it

>>11848024
Just make a hopper that goes to 2000 meters and pretend it’s a bold success

>>11848027
He didn't say Jeff

>>11847632
the second stage shuttle would also not require payload bays because it would strictly be a crew vehicle

>all this shit just to lift 5 tons with 2 boosters or 8 tons with 4
fuck gravity bros

>>11847875
>4ASS buys a Cargo Starship launch full of insecticide and aims at the crater
>mission name "Zit Popper"

>>11848059
>K-125
What's your naming convention?

>>11848012
because the engines were mostly complete after a few years of egghead labor and the software base came out of the falcon project. all the mexican welders had to do was put together a big tank, so it was made thicker than would be acceptable for a finalized vehicle to make it trivially easy to reach pressure.

>>11847710
Yes. Orbital lasercoms are a difficult problem but very much worth it.

>>11848059
That's odd, it's nearly exactly half the wet mass of Falcon 9 Full Thrust which can hoist nearly 25 tons expendable.

>>11848097
It looks to me like anon's rocket doesn't get close to the TWR of an F9, so it makes some sense.

You're digging a trench on Mars and discover human remains. What do

>>11848120
Sprinkle some crack.

>>11848059
What does that stage 1 twr of 0.54 mean ? Is it not counting the boosters ?

>>11848120
keep digging

>>11848112
That was going to be my first guess as to why it's capacity is a bit low. Anon >>11848059 you may need to start upscaling your engines, your rocket is probably wasting too much time in the lower atmosphere.

>>11848120
lay down in the trench, cover myself with dirt and complete the cycle

>>11848135
My guess is it's not in correct order; 1.66 is probably the sideboosters (two sets of two) and 1.5 is the main booster. Still low.

>>11848148
Yea I guess that makes sense
1.50 being the Center stage

>>11848059
>tfw want to install those mods but don't want to go through all the installation blues

>>11847667
>5 km/s of delta V, wich isn't that hard to archive with an ISP of about 450 s.
Yeah, that delta V is easy to achieve using methalox and kerolox too, you only need a 75% propellant mass ratio. Hydrolox at 450 Isp means you only need a 68% propellant mass ratio, but achieving 68% with the propellant bulk density of hydrolox is much harder than doing the same with any hydrocarbon propellant.

>>11848075
a fucking mess is what it is
I started out with this guy just as a sounding rocket/ICBM since I couldn't afford my first orbital launch design at the time, but then it ended up evolving into my main rocket family since it worked well
K-10 was the original ICBM, then K-15 added a cheap upper stage and K-16 through K-18 were some minor adjustments, then K-25 bumped up the main diameter to 2.5m and elongated upper stage and added a bunch of control and avionics improvements, and K-125 is a K-25 but scaled up everything and a more efficient upper stage engine

t. consistent naming schemes expert

>>11848135
>>11848148
the stage numbering goes down from the top of the rocket, stage 1 is the upper stage and stage 4 is the main engine + boosters at launch

>>11848192
Don't feel bad about the naming scheme. There are no perfect ones.

t. uses random rivers to name spacecraft

>>11848204
I just think up something cool sounding, and each failed test bump the number up by 1.
"Starfucker-12" and so on.

>>11848180
haha it's not that bad bro, only took me a literal fucking week and half to get all my mods sorted out

>>11848214
Are there any good guides beyond what's on github?

>>11848214
Shieeet I've only spent a few hours in modding hell, but the new ESA update seems to have absolutely fucked up tweakscale to the point where nothing I try with it is working.

>/sfg/ - Kerbal Space Program General

>>11848230
I've stopped updating KSP for this exact reason. They release small patches that completely crucify my arsenal of mods

>>11848232
The last one couldn't live because there are too many gachas in /vg/.

>>11848235
Might actually be the version of TS too, I tried rolling back to 1.8.1 and it still threw the error. I guess I'll have to go find an older version of the mod itself and see if that works.

>>11848228
I mean if you want a standard RO/RP1 install you can just follow the install guide and have it working within an hour, the part that takes a lot of time is just fucking around trying out other mods and figuring out what shit you want to install and then dealing with compatibility and all that shit
If I knew what kind of install I wanted at the beginning it would have taken me much less time to get it set up, most of the fucking around was just trying to figure out what I actually wanted to play

>>11848251
>standard RO/RP1 install
You mean this specifically? https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/wiki

>>11846716
i hope they pick a decent diameter for the pipe, imagine it getting blocked by a martian fish

>>11847847
>UV is the easiest shit to block.
If you're building a habitat or a suit, yeah. If you're an exposed microbe out on the surface, no. I was talking about why Earth life can't currently survive outside on Mars.

How can a liquid-fuelled rocket fire up in space?
If the rocket is already accelerating that provides gravity, but what if the engines turn off and the fuel is just floating around?

>>11847851
When they do Mars surface condition analog experiments they don't blast the chamber with UV light, anon. Also, if UV wasn't a big deal, we wouldn't use UV lamps to continually sterilize the entire interior surface of laboratories.

>>11848275
Unlikely, but imagine going all the way to some place like Mars or Europa only to have your water pipe blocked by some weird jellyfish-like life form lmao

>>11848271
yeah, https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/wiki/RO-&-RP-1-Installation-for-1.8.1 and https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/wiki/Recommended-Extra-Mods has about 90% of what I'm using

>>11848279
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ullage_motor

>>11848279
Small ullage motors will fire to help settle propellants in the tank.

>>11848284
>land
>immediately kill indigenous life
The Planetary Protection types would never let us live it down, ever.

>>11847952
>no horizontal movement
see >>11847940
To make it an orbital vehicle you put it on top of a second, larger recoverable stage, exactly like how to make Starship useful it gets launched by Super Heavy.

>>11848279
generally a small burn from RCS or a little solid motor to settle the main tank
for liquid RCS propellants they have a piston/bladder/diaphram/magic capillary bullshit like >>11847714 in the tank to push it out

>>11847960
>The difficulty is taking an actual launch vehicle and landing it after its boosted its payload downrange at 3 km/s
That is not hard, though. SpaceX was able to figure that out by retro-engineering a rocket stage while flying actual missions.

>>11848024
Good stage mass fractions and high TWR engines are your friends.

>>11848283
Are you trying to say that UV and general ionizing radiation defences are not a thing in bacteria? Because that's nonsense. Yes, you use UV to sterilize bacteria, but there is no such thing as 100% foolproof sterilization and we don't concern ourselves with edgecase extremophiles under most circumstances.

>>11848120
get flustered and jerk off

>>11848294
They can get fucked. Aliens are for there to sate our curiosity

>>11848192
Sounds like Elon naming anything

>>11848306
>there is no such thing as 100% foolproof sterilization
yeah there fucking is, lmao. Samples of even the most radiologically hardened microbes we've ever discovered are 100% killed by exposure to Mars surface UV after less than an hour. That is to say, nothing grows on the agar after exposure, anon.

>>11848311
>three roughly evenly spaced stars
>three roughly evenly spaced pyramids
Ah yes, the ancient alien pyramids

>>11846616
Move Jupiter to Earth's orbit, making Earth a moon.
That way, there's four nearby large bodies to visit instead of just one.
Luna can take Jupiter's place I guess. Hard to say whether it'd be a planet, it's far more massive than any dwarf planet but far less massive than any planet.

>>11848328
We took them from the ayys, because we're better than them.

>>11848302
SpaceX designed their rocket from the ground up to land
You can’t just add legs to a delta V boosters and land them.

None of these other rocket companies are doing the vertical integration or design philosophy that Spacex is.

Without cheap engines, you have nothing.

>>11848324
Go look it up yourself, under Mars conditions bacteria survive. If you relax any of the controlling factors, they even grow. UV is an important factor, but not even the most important one, and even with all factors combined even non-specialists survive. When bacteria experience stress they go dormant and become incredibly difficult to kill.

>>11848120
Scream from the realization that the 2005 DOOM movie is gonna be real.

>>11848336
They literally redesigned it completely from the first version of Falcon 9 to now.

>>11848344
UV destroys DNA and proteins regardless of whether its in an active cell or a dormant one.

>>11847922
>the only liquid methane exists at the poles
nope

>>11848336
>Without cheap engines, you have nothing.
And so of course the SLS was doomed from the word go.

>>11848120
depends if its a male or female skeleton
if it's female, have sex with it
if it's male, have sex with it but say no homo

>>11846716
imagine what kind of funky microscopic shit is lurking in martian aquifers. who would want to be the first to drink that. no thank you

>>11848360
Of course.

They did it to themselves again, holy fuck. How god damn stupid are these Slavs?

>>11848371
>Sweden
And nothing of value was lost

>>11848354
>Vegetative E. coli cells were maintained in a Mars analog soil for 7 days under simulated Mars conditions that included temperatures between 20 and -50 degrees C for a day/night diurnal period, UVC irradiation (200 to 280 nm) at 3.6 W m(-2) for daytime operations (8 h), pressures held at a constant 0.71 kPa, and a gas composition that included the top five gases found in the martian atmosphere. Cell densities of E. coli failed to increase under simulated Mars conditions, and survival was reduced 1 to 2 orders of magnitude by the interactive effects of desiccation, UV irradiation, high salinity, and low pressure (in decreasing order of importance). Results suggest that E. coli may be able to survive, but not grow, in surficial soils on Mars.
Note: not a specialist, literally just e. coli; martian UV conditions administered addition to all other factors; still survived. If it had been a specialized under ionizing radiation conditions, the significance of that category would have dropped way to the bottom of the list. It does list pressure at the bottom, but keep in mind that the most important factor was "desiccation", not UV, ie the product of vaccuum-like conditions.

>>11848375
>>11848371

I HOPE NO ONE NOTICES WE JUST USED A NUKE ON OURSELVES BY ACCIDENT FOR A SECOND TIME.

>>11848371
Not great but not terrible, man up Swedes it's only a couple of roentgen.

https://www.rocketmotorparts.com/Hydroxyl-terminated_Polybutadiene_Resin_12_Gallon/p1577809_15683131.aspx
Looking for rubber to use for a solid motor, and this is the best I can find. My question is that doesn't the resin need some other agent to turn into solid rubber, or does it "set" like glue upon contact with the air?

pic semi-related

>>11848382
>3.6

>>11848379
what happened to that place in russia, why is it so hot?

>>11848389
They nuked themselves. This is the second time now. They've been trying to make an infinite range rocket engine since Putin made it a national priority in like 2015, then about a year and a half ago they fucked up and it exploded and sent fissile material everywhere. Now it's happened again, except this time with a much larger boom.

>>11848393
to heat an area that large that much it'd take like a 100 megaton detonation

>>11848401
Welcome to Russia.

>>11848402
there is no way they can hide a 100 megaton detonation

>>11848404
This, Tsar was only half that.

>>11848309
A fellow man of science
>>11848311
We should unironically bring dolphins to Mars

>>11848410
and it caused windows to shatter in western europe. which makes me wonder why the hell an area of europe that large was heated up to 60 degrees celcius, which is 140 degrees fahrenheit, there should of been a massive forest fire

>>11848418
The assumption is that the reading is accurate. My guess is that while there was an associated temperature anomaly, it was a localized effect that whatever sensor this is took as wider ranging than it was due to some contrivance of the way it functions, like taking a localized hot spot at a high altitude as a generalized warming.

>>11848418
probably a squirrel chewed some wires in the weather station

>>11848430
>>11848428
that is my guess as well

>>11848386
>>11848382
based dyatlov posting

lmao, arianespace started their livestream just to announce a scrub due to wind

>>11848447
Didn't they do that last night too

>>11848418
There’s no trees on the island they bombed.

>>11848464
Last night, they announced a scrub AFTER the time the launch was supposed to happen, but no livestream

>>11848384
Nevermind. I found out about the plasticizers. Anyone here have any experience working with HTPB?

>>11848428
It’s obvious how they make the map, the colours are just a gradient between the numbers
Shoulda deleted the outlier

test

bros... how much does launch insurance cost...

>>11848854
Are those stand-in mirrors or something? JWST has the fancy gold ones

>>11848894
that's just the bare beryllium plates being tested before they were coated with gold

>>11848903
How the fuck do you focus on image with different hexagonal mirrors like I don’t understand that at all

>>11848907
basically you just grind up about $10 billion and spray it all over the mirrors and shit works out

>>11848907
Optics are funky, man. Think of how a dragonfly brain creates an image from the input of hundreds of separate lenses in its eyes.

>>11848907
The mirrors are all shapes as if you cut them out of a single large mirror. The images this thing takes will look like seven hexagons put together, by the way. It doesn't somehow magically turn into a single element image.

>>11848854
If you have to ask, then you can't afford it.

We are going to permanently decommission Arianespace and France if JWST blows up, right?

>>11848987
They'll go out of business soon enough

>>11848987
Ariane 5 is super reliable but I assume if it blows up NASA will be quite pissed

>>11848987
and i mean in minecraft of course haha

>>11848987
Christ this thing unnerves me and I'm not sure why, maybe the semi-upright posture and knowing how big it was.

>>11849020
horse apes going extinct was the greatest tragedy of the pleistocene

>>11849033
True but the Permian mass extinction will always be the craziest thing to happen on Earth.
Also when is the next spacex launch?

>>11849020
We've had a lot of animals on this planet that I'm glad aren't around anymore.
Have you ever just sat and thought about Tyrannosaurus rex? Actually, seriously, thought about it? This planet produced a predator that was 12ft tall at the hip and could run at 30-40mph. That thing was unbelievably horrifying.

>>11849075
A fucking mouth on legs. Consider the size of sauropods too, what in the fuck was Earth up to before we came around? Whole epochs feel alien.

>>11849095
Earth has made pretty much everything you could think of at some point

>>11848854
>worlds most expensive makeup mirror

>>11848181
It's the 70's or 80's at that point, they didn't figure that out untill about about 30 years later.
Alternatively it's the 1960s and we're doing Apollo via orbital assembly.

>>11849115
Not sentient arthropods, probably.

>>11849075
fucking raptors
bugs the size of dogs. some that can fly.
nope

>>11849133
HUMMINGBIRD-SIZED BEES

Damn when I was in historical geology I went through a phase where I was fascinated with life. Especially the creation and early evolution of it. My professor was really cool and always talked about the RNA World and Rare Earth Hypothesis. I want to find alien life bros, even if it’s just cellular colonies in the oceans of Enceladus.

>>11849147
Is there anyone who seriously thinks the development of life was a one-time fluke anymore?
I too long for the moment extraterrestrial life is confirmed and not simply assumed, even some shitty lichen in a lame-ass cave would fit the bill.

>>11849141
>you're on a colony ship heading to an earth like planet in some far away solar system
>probes have been but only to orbit for basic mapping of landing sites, atmosphere analysis, stuff like that
>when you arrive there is no turning back, no going home, no plan b
>land on the surface with minimal weapons and it's like skull fucking island: the planet
>you are bottom of the food chain even to many plants
if i stepped off the ship to be greeted by a woodlouse the size of my foot id be straight back in the ship and use what remaining fuel it had to fly it into the nearest mountain

>>11849141
>According to all known laws of aviation, bees shouldn't be able to fly ...

>>11848920
That's not how multi-element mirrors work, Anon.
All mirrors get focuses onto the same spot, creating the large aperture required to avoid diffraction.
To do so it requires some insanely precise calibration using collimated light, the good thing is that space is fullnof collimated light sources of parallel light rays (stars, yes technicly not parallel but closer to parrallel than we can fucking measure) to see what is out of alignment and correct that.
Once the mirrors are aligned properly, you have a huge primary and secondary mirror aligned properly and you can run insanely long focal lengths without major issue due to diffraction.

>>11849131
Arthropoda are sentient

>>11846706
Most of these rovers couldn‘t identify a microbe if they found it.
Also most of them don‘t even get sent to the most promissing spots for life because they aren‘t sterile enough. But of course they never even plan one that‘s more sterile. Robotic exploration is a meme.

>>11849166
With how many have died under my shoe I sure hope not.

>>11849155
That sounds like paradise. Just imagine the lifeform diversity to document!

>>11849033
I will never forgive myself for not being alive while Paraceratherium was alive