/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11853166
I suppose that if metallic hydrogen had been metastable in somewhat natural conditions, we would have found some

INCELADUS WHEN

shitpost rockets when?

>>11853183
>he thinks autists will be allowed on the first martian colony

oh no no no

>>11853210

>>11853305
Uhm, sweaty, what about Elon?

>>11853327
elon will die before he ever sets foot on mars, screencap this

Scientifically speaking, what's the most phallic rocket ever flown?

>>11853464
Falcon Heavy, easily.

>>11853464
all rockets are phallic in all of shape, purpose and spirit. They're large, piercing, powerful, symbolic vanity projects. Honestly I'm surprised all of rocketry hasn't been #canceled because of how loaded the entire concept is—I guess Shotwell being an industry leader helps.

>>11853464
New Shepard. Thing’s got a fucking mushroom head.

>>11853200
maybe one day when we have nanobots and smart matter we can have stable metallic hydrogen. by then we might just have fusion rockets or some equally sci fi shit

>>11853235
>>11853270
based bookbros

>>11853183
If there was a perfectly spherical planet, would an orbit one foot above the ground be possible?

>>11853634
if it didnt have any atmosphere yeah

>>11853166
sauce?

Shouldn’t you be able to refine silicon metal from the shittons of silicates that make up just about all regolith?

>>11853753
yeah, you just slap some sand into an electric arc furnace with some coke and you're good to go
takes a shitton of power though

>>11853305
Who are you quoting?

>>11853305
the president of autism is funding the trip so why not

>>11853634
how low can you go: moon edition
slap a camera on that bitch would get some nice footage.

How would a Martian smelter operate?
Graphite electrodes would be a pain in the ass to get/make and what would you react to get the oxygen out or a flux
You might need a nuclear plant to get enough power for it

>>11853871
there are a host of technical and logistic problems that make in situ metallurgy a huge headache so I imagine it's going to be all resupply ships with sheets of metal for many, many decades until any infrastructure of that kind could be built.

>>11853871
>>11853881
More the reason to start on the Moon.

>>11853634
>>11853639
There's also other perturbations like gravity from other objects, solar radiation pressure, or even fancier things like Yarkovsky effect
(btw, this guy though about this effect back in 1900, when we barely understood the effects of radiation pressure)

>>11853464
Atlas with Starliner on top.

>>11853871
Can you explain more about the difficulties? Electrodes could be shipped if you couldn't make them and it seems like you could use hou's process for flux.

>>11853894
All the more reason to ship a ton of shit to Mars*

>>11853881
you would imagine wrong, you brain damaged retard

>>11853871
very painfully

>>11853894
based mac rebisz poster

>>11853911
A lot of the issues for large scale metallurgy is that we don’t have ore mapping for a lot of necessary elements on Mars

>>11853923
t. hand-waving printerfag who has no concept of how underdeveloped the field of operating industrial equipment in space is (it doesn't exist)

GPS launch thread will be up soon

>>11853937
What do you mean by industrial equipment?

>could have built dozens of Skylab-sized stations
>we get the ISS instead

>>11853965
the equipment involved in an industry of any kind

>>11853986
Pretty sure the ET-derived wet workshop concept was significantly larger than Skylab’s S-IVB.

>>11853506
It's literally easier to have male astronauts. The wrongness of girly peeing holes is literally a severe problem in spaceflight. But of course swj nasa will never prioritize science over feelings

>>11854022
They can pee in my mouth if they need to.

>>11854039
based

>>11853881
You can make steel in your backyard.. it doesn’t need to be fancy super high quality stuff

>>11854022
>The wrongness of girly peeing holes
you’ve never put your cock in one then faggot

>>11853986
Easier for them to just burn it up in the atmosphere after reaching almost orbit lol
Fuck nasa but that’s really just another example of how wasteful the shuttle architecture was

>>11854055
why bother with that, just stop by the space home depot and pick up some prefab stuff

>>11854055
based and maopilled

>>11854070
>TFW you realize there are no sparrows on mars

>>11854079
I think we're onto something

bros is my dick too thin

>>11853894
Magic antigravity or artist not understanding orbital mechanics?

>>11854111
>magic antigravity
just give a few taps on the RCS and you can hover over an asteroid just fine

>>11854111
The painting description says that the ship is over the Uranus moon of Ophelia. It has a surface gravity of about 0.7*10^-3 that of Earth's, so a ship could conceivably use it's RCS thrusters to hover with relative ease.

>>11854094
Damn it! Stop tempting me to jump down the rabbit hole of KSP mods.

>>11854137
Oh neat.

>>11854143
I'm reinstalling now, been a few months since my last binge

>>11854143
it's time to take the modpill son

>>11854057
Anon you’re not supposed to fuck the urethra

launch thread
>>11854158

>>11854171
fuck i was just about to take a sleep

>>11854039
Greetings

>>11854163
You’d be surprised what some people manage to do out of stupidity or ignorance.

>>11854157
So, I can just copy the KSP folder in the steamapps folder to have two different installs of the game? One vanilla and one modded?

at what point to launch escape systems usually get jettisoned on actual launches

>>11854189
yeah thats the way to go

>>11854198
>at what point to launch escape systems usually get jettisoned on actual launches
I think it's when the booster or core stage burns out. That's what I do at least.

>>11854198
>yeah thats the way to go
Thanks. Hopefully RO/RP-1 works on 1.9.1.

>>11854209
It doesn't since kopernicus still isn't updated for 1.9.1, just grab 1.8.1 and you'll be good to go

Weather for SpaceX launch looking “60% Favorable”
WHY MUST EVERY LAUNCH GET SCRUBBED

>>11854218
ULA weather machines

>>11854218
Can’t it just fly through?
Rockets and airplanes are designed with lightning in mind

Could this guy on the NSF stream possibly have a faggier voice

>>11854242
It's usually not because of the rocket at all, but that if the rocket were to fail the capsule would end up landing in seas too rough from storm winds for it to handle.

>>11854269
>the capsule
Anon, I...

>>11854079
There are no Chinamen or communists there either.

>>11854269
Que? It’s based on two things really (at least for the sake of falcon 9):
• landing the first stage in bad weather is unfavorable, and they really want to recover those things to keep costs down
• Falcon 9 (and most others rockets) are very tall, and very slender. High winds means your rocket is at risk for being blown slightly sideways. While the rocket can certainly adjust for this, it’s really bad to be blown like that in a thick atmosphere when you’re moving at mach 1 or above. The wind shear alone will tear the rocket apart. Supposedly Starship won’t have this problem

>>11854218
Because fucking Florida and Kennedy Scrub Center.

>>11854279
>>11854299
My bad, I was thinking of one of the reasons given for the Crew2 scrub.

>>11854218
T-0 of 4:10 p.m. EDT due to upper-level winds

Amazon wades deeper into the swamp, hires a retired Space Force Major-General (I was surprised he existed, too) to run AWS's new space division. This is probably related to why Blue Onanism runs like an oldspace company.

https://blog.aboutamazon.com/innovation/amazon-web-services-unveils-new-space-business-segment

>>11854297
>tfw he believes this
where do you think they were great leaping forward to...

>>11854329
Their own graves.

>>11854329
Missing orbit, crushing small villages on the way up, and burning up in reentry like every other Chinese rocket?

>>11854329
so we get to go fight bug people on the red planet?
radical

Be like the great Chinese communist role model Lei Feng and don't exist.

>>11854143
>the visual upgrade mods don't work with my version of KSP

Space Force let go boys!

>>11854319
oh god jeff please don't put up a satellite constellation we can only have so many before it blocks out the sun

>>11854497
That's been in progress for years. Amazon Project Kuiper.

>>11854497
Bezos is the type of faggot who would launch a giant orbital advertisement screen the angular size of the moon and broadcast some BLM shit for the whole Earth to see

>>11854532

>>11854555
>It's called Delta IV because first stage hydrolox cannot into Delta-V.

Would LiH7 be a viable rocket fuel?

For anyone who thinks SN has been canceled this week..

UPDATE: Public Notice of Cameron County Order to Temporarily Close State Highway 4 and Boca Chica Beach
Primary Date June 30, 2020 7:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date July 1, 2020 7:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date July 2, 2020 7:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. Closure Scheduled

Cryo test expected.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQo1HIcSVtg

>>11854576

proonted graphene hydrolox ssto spaceplanes

Talk me out of buying parts to build my own sounding rocket.

pic semi related

>>11854626
i'm going to talk you into it.
do it faggot! do it!

Exclusive view from on board the barge from today's launch.

Moon landing by 2024 isn't going to happen

>>11854654
So? That's no basis for giving up on the endeavor.

>>11854634
All I would end up making is small solid propellant motors. I don't even have any basic machining tools.

MARS 2020 LAUNCH DATE JUST SLIPPED REEEEEEEE

>>11854669
so?

>>11854609
with depots

At first I thought Endeavor was a gay call sign for DM-2, but then I remembered Apollo 15 was Falcon+Endeavor.

>>11854669
nobody machines rockets anymore, you need to PROOOONT

Why doesn't SpaceX reuse a single core over and over with a mass simulator to test its reusability limit instead of using a bunch of them on actual missions where there's a possibility of losing a payload?

>>11854739
Too expensive. Cheaper to just test as they fly. And besides, the chances of a lost payload during launch is very small.

>>11854739
starlink satellites are basically a mass simulator

>>11854553
probably

>>11854739
>>11854745
To add on to this I’m pretty sure the chances of a “booster failure” are approaching zero for SpaceX, and if there IS a failure it would most likely happen because of a failed landing- not an explosive launch. I mean shuttle reused it’s SRB’s... and THOSE were at risk of exploding during launch

>>11854654
spacex could do a manned moon landing next year if they wanted to, even though the starship crew version won't be ready, they could probably do something with falcon heavy

>>11854768
Launch two expendable Heavys and have the lander dock with Dragon on the way there.

>>11854297
>actually thinking this
why do you think they call it the "red"
planet?

>>11854816
Based
don’t tell them brother. The cultural revolution must continue on our new home
Long live the invincible thought of Mao Zedong!
Long live Jiang Qing!
Long live the revolution!
LONG LIVE MARXISM-LENINISM-MAOISM-PRINTISM

>>11854673
Don't make me do it.

>>11854716
I'm too poor for 3D proonters.

>>11854849
Long live angkar! Ceyoo ceyoo angkar, long live angkar the awesome, the far-sighted, the powerful! Comrade Pol Pot did nothing wrong!

>>11854965
I'm just waiting for metal proonters to get under $10k, then it's sounding SRB time.

https://twitter.com/NASA_SLS/status/1277725389004115968
>The twin solid rocket boosters produce more than 75% of the thrust for each SLS launch.
Imagine how much more mass to orbit you'd get with a core stage that isn't FUCKING HYDROLOX.

>>11855041
Why oh why didn't they go for the sane option, the Pyrios?

>>11855041
You want NASA to redesign again? It will take another 50 years to get to moon at this rate.

>>11855067
Too much kick. They'd need to have not used a sustainer core.

>>11855041
Why don’t people use liquid fuel boosters more often?

>>11855081
That's pussy talk. Have you seen how fucking anemic the ascent of the SLS will be be? It's like a morbidly obese asthmatic climbing the stairs compared to other rockets.
And then there's the payload it can lift. It's a fucking turd.

>>11855082
Liquid boosters are used more often. SRBs is mainly an American thing. My guess it got started by Thor-Delta due to the small tank diameter of the core stage necessitating boosters that can be easily applied to a rocket that originally didn't have them.

>>11854792
>making sense when it comes to outer space
lol

>>11854553
Can someone calculate how big that sign would have to be if its in LEO?

Is metric time the future of time keeping in a colonized solar system? What would be the base time unit for it? Second? Hour? 10^43 Planck times?

>>11855082
SRBs are much easier to build with American 20th century missile technology. Reusable liquid boosters that land retropropulsively are better in pretty much every way (size, ISP, cost of second flight) but right now only SpaceX has them.

>>11855137
whatever it is it has to take into account time dilation

>>11855137
>Is metric time the future of time keeping in a colonized solar system?
No. It'll be like today where computers have a steady (modulo relativistic shenanigans) count of seconds since the Unix epoch and humans have a time system that makes sense to our monkey brains.

>>11853551
agreed, it's also more accurate in terms of length/girth

Would it be worth it to park Falcon upper stages in orbit, for later reuse as part of a larger spacecraft?

>>11855162
That was one of the earliest 4ASS memes.

>>11855162
No, reutilizing them would take more effort than it's worth, at best. If you wanted to use cumulative Falcon launches to do something in orbit you'd just utilize payloads, but with Starship in development that also isn't worth developing.

>>11855176
IIRC this discussion grew out of how stupidly expensive SLS was and how "just throw more Falcon Heavy launches at it lol" was a serious option that would actually reduce costs even if Starship development was cancelled.

>>11855184
You mean this?

>>11855184
God damn SLS is so fucking ugly, why why WHY do we use hydrogen??? It’s just an anemic money pit. Imagine this with RP1, IT WOULDN'T EVEN NEED THE SRB’S

>>11855205
They had a meme (muh mars direct, muh parts bin) to sell it, but mostly the appeal of the SLS is that it provides an excuse to "maintain" govt. jobs and contractors via gross expenditures when they should be obsolete. If they used a halfway sane rocket, it wouldn't do what they want, which is to support a bunch of crusty boomers in job-starved regions.

>>11855205
Hell, just use a third SRB as a core first stage, and use a single RS-25 with a vacuum bell and a MUCH SMALLER hydrolox tank set for the second stage. Boom, done.

>>11855214
God I hope it fucking eviscerates on its first launch. Maybe then Jim will send out a tweet about his disappointment with Boeing and the contractors they wanted to keep employed. Is there anything SLS is good for that other rockets can’t do? Like there has to be ONE saving grace about it

>>11855223
>Is there anything SLS is good for that other rockets can’t do? Like there has to be ONE saving grace about it
It is the heaviest lift launcher that will fly the soonest, or at least it seems that way.

>>11855223
>Is there anything SLS is good for that other rockets can’t do? Like there has to be ONE saving grace about it
If it flew before Starship+SuperHeavy it would be the most powerful rocket ever to reach orbit, but that's looking less and less likely.

>>11855225
At this point SLS is "late 2021" with red flags included, so I'm gonna say it's doubtful it flies before 2022. At this point I think SS has a decent shot of beating it to orbit, albeit with a test payload (which is a bit of an unfair comparison as SLS would be using a test payload too if it didn't cost multibillions per launch).

>>11855184
I was doing some rough numbers and figured you could build two or three lunar mission yeet trains with a decent payload for the same price as one SLS launch, using a combo of F9/FH launches.
I think (not totally sure) that you could do decent kick stages with reusable-profile F9 launches.

>>11855229
>the most powerful rocket ever
Except it can't lift shit, it's lugging around practically nothing but dead weight.

>>11855205
butt we alreddy habb da engins

>space force revealed its organizational structure today
>2 of the major commands are named after spock and star trek
stargate btfo

>>11854070
>Marsboss says you need extra steel sheets to repair holes in Starship
>Cut parts off your Starship, melt down and fabricate steel sheets
>Weld them back on

>>11854555
>Can I copy your homework?
>Sure but make sure you change something so it's not obvious

>>11854555
lmao I just saw the bottom

>>11855253
Apparently Space Force was going to go with Vanguards instead of Squadrons for what they called their units, but BLM happened and people said Vanguard is racist so they changed it to Squadrons at the last minute.

>>11855287
:/ vanguards would have been based fuck BLM its not like they're going to space.

>>11854626
>Shoving a rocket up your pee hole
why

>>11855270
There's only so many ways you can strap cores together.

>>11855296
there's only so many you can assemble the eight Taco Bell ingredients together

>>11855270
>when the dude who copied you gets a 98% but you only got a 72%

>>11855151
Monkey brain is inferior. Embrace logic. Embrace steel.

https://youtu.be/Hxv51-E6PvA?t=2594
;_;

>>11855287
How is vanguard racist, moreover how do you guys even make it into space with such a serious nigger problem.

https://twitter.com/SpaceflightNow/status/1278115559490686977
https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1278102062149091332

Oh no no no
Old Space bros, we got too cocky...

>>11855371
Based SpaceX ninjas preventing NASA from jeopardizing their mission by finding life on the surface.

>>11855367
I have no idea on either count.

>>11855367
A lack of niggers isn't doing any wonders for asia or europe.

>>11855367
>how do you guys even make it into space with such a serious nigger problem
We should learn from China and drop hypergolics on them.

>>11855367
>>11855382
Getting away from the joggers is a great motivation.

>>11855371
>An issue with the United Launch Alliance Atlas 5 rocket that will send NASA’s $2.4 billion Perseverance rover toward Mars has delayed the mission’s launch date to no earlier than July 30, nearly halfway through a month-long interplanetary launch window.
RESULTS!

>>11855371
>inb4 they miss the window

>>11855401
Stick the rover on a FHEAVY.

It's got more delta V.

>>11855382
> No darkies in Europe
Anon, I...

Asia is doing fairly well. Japan is quitely plugging away on cheap unique missions like asteroid return samples. China is slowly getting it's shit together spacewise. Both have Mars missions coming up, though for Japan are just selling the ride. India has a hardon for smolsats which seems to be their niche calling.

Didn't know there was a space exploration/space general in 4chan. Usually some pop up on /pol/

Science anons, we need to form a secret society, elect an emperor, a leader, make contacts with billionares like Musk and live on the orbit of Earth. There we should deslocate some asteroids to the orbit of the planet and use them to enforce our rule as The Empire of Humanity.

The only way humanity will survive to conquer the stars is to select a special few of the 7 billion, people who can lead, study, produce, contribute for humanity.

Yes, I have a fucking sense of grandeur, specially when we are a species that should've conquered our solar system by now, everything is moving at a slow fucking pace and I fear we may start to regress...

>>11855411
>Miss 2020 window because oldspace
>Share the 2022 window with Starships putting down hundreds of tons on the surface
I want to see it happen

>>11855314
Yeah I think they came out with “cheesy rolls” after running out of ideas. Just tortillas and queso man

>>11853200
Well you'd have to get in below the atmosphere of Jupiter but the gravity is so mindblowing you'd never get to it.

>>11855401
>that has always favored results over rhetoric
that is literally SpaceX though, and rhetoric over results is literally ULA

>>11855484
That's why the ad was a meme pretty much immediately

>>11854768
They could do a lunar orbital mission easily within a month or two if they really wanted too..

>>11855079
You might as well use the Soviet moon rocket and just add a fucking a microprocessor and modern software.

>>11854768
A modified 2 man dragon could do it easy. Legs and a ladder on the service module, and an airlock with eva suits docked to the nose.

The hardest part is relocating the toilet. Which is next to the nose hatch.

>>11855508
>oops a screw got loose in the turbo pumps.

Anyone here use python for orbital mechanics/general space stuff? Wanna get into python in a way that interests me.

>>11855523
no but I have used Matlab

OC COMING THROUGH

After weeks of shouting back and forth in circles with other anons about the Plasma Magnet Sail, I decided to email Jeff Greason, the guy who gave the TVIW talk about interplanetary and interstellar missions the sail enabled, about some of the questions raised. The answers are below.

>The anomalously high 0.5g acceleration for one of the ship designs
It turns out that the 0.5g number was a complete misinterpretation by the Centauri Dreams article writer, and that the reference 2500kg ship / 10cm sail accelerates at 0.5m/s^2 rather than 0.5g. That's still enough to get you up to 20km/s in 40000s, or less than 11.5 hours of thrust, which is perfectly doable for a fast Mars mission, and you might actually be able to brake at the end without nuking yourself Orion style or burning up in the Martian atmosphere.

>scaling up
The 30m sail-coil math -does- work out, which means you can get truly excellent payload fractions at larger ship masses. With a 1000 metric ton (one gigagram) ship you can get over 90% payload by mass and accelerate at 0.006017m/s^2, which is about 519.87 m/s of delta-V every day, so you can hit that same 20km/s "go anywhere in the solar system" velocity in 40 days of continuous power.

>materials
Superconductors are required to get anything like the described efficiencies out of the plasma magnet sail, since the current is time-varying to produce the rotating field. However, he did say that existing superconductors would be enough to carry the 90kA current needed for the full sized sail.

>why Neptune
The reason Neptune works better for braking is because its magnetosphere is physically larger than Jupiter's without carrying the same

>>11855540
*without carrying the same lethal radiation intensity, so you can cut across its diameter the long way to slow down.

>>11855523
>python
I look down on these people.
If you want to half-ass program use matlab or octave.
Otherwise learn ASM & C/C++. Goddamn.

>>11855556
Thanks.

>>11855574
Woah, shit. Sorry, after re-reading what I wrote I realize it came off as really mean.
I wanted it to sound condescending, not mean.

>>11855556
>>11855578
There is nothing wrong with Python for exploratory programming. I use a Python REPL as a calculator when I'm arguing with people on /sci/. Yes, assembly, C, C++, Rust, and Go are all better for "real" applications, but often times you're just going to be running a calculation once or twice rather than shipping a binary to ten million users, at which point Python+NumPy+SciPy is perfectly sufficient for most things.

>>11855578
Yeah no worries, I figured as much.

>>11855582
But the problem I have is that it's not as functional as lower language (like C) but it's lower than matlab/octave.
I, personally, never find myself in a situation where it's warranted.
Either I can go with GNU Octave for basic math or I want C/C++.

Especially, if you're doing this stuff for a while. You'll end up with such a massive library of functions that it can be quicker to do it this way.
>>11855590
No, anon. It wasn't nice of me.

Has anyone here learned programming just for the hell of it? I’m a geology major and we had to learn basic MATLAB, but I found it stupid (although all the geophysicists love it). I would love to learn to write my own programs to plot, specifically on ternary diagrams (basically triangles with each apex representing 100%). Any recommendations on what I should learn? Also dumb question but is VBA considered a “language” I could learn/something that would be useful?

>>11855436
would Starship even be able to launch useful cargo in 2022, or would it just be some cybertrucks?

>>11855609
The first Starship on Mars needs to plant an American flag. After that the first few will just be bulk supplies.

>>11855605
While I'm this >>11855556 guy. For someone like you Python is probably what you want to go with. Particularly if you just want to get your wick wet.
VBA is a language but it's pretty much oriented to business applications. You can do other things with it but I wouldn't. And it's legacy at this point - you mean VB.NET. But you'd be sticking yourself into the microsoft ecosystem.

If you plan on actually getting into it you might want to start with Java. It gets a lot of shit but it will prepare you for C-like languages without making you learn pointers. (C# is Microsoft's Java; again sticking you with Windows)
Pointers aren't difficult to understand but for some reason people run into issues with them. I think it's because they get stuck with poor teachers.

Or, you know, learn C/C++.

>>11855616
The flag, and the a sample return mission.

>>11855432
Lurk more

>>11855540
>>11855544
could you add enough radiation shielding to break at jupiter

>>11855650
Possibly, but you'd also need shielded EVA suitd to do anything outside. That's harder except maybe on Ganymede.

>>11855650
No, it's because Neptune's field is the biggest that it's just doable. you would still slow down going through Jupiter's field but you would be out the other side before you had lost enough speed.

>>11855540
>The 30m sail-coil math -does- work out, which means you can get truly excellent payload fractions at larger ship masses. With a 1000 metric ton (one gigagram) ship you can get over 90% payload by mass and accelerate at 0.006017m/s^2, which is about 519.87 m/s of delta-V every day, so you can hit that same 20km/s "go anywhere in the solar system" velocity in 40 days of continuous power.
Welp. At least it's useful for interplanetary travel.

>>11855769
It always caps out at solar wind velocity or at the heliopause, whichever you hit first.

Imagine being RocketLab and complaining about Starlink narrowing your launch windows when the only reason you're even in business is because Elon doesn't give a shit enough to develop a babby Falcon for dedicated smallsat launches. If it was Bezos instead they'd have gone bankrupt 5 years ago

>>11855540
Honestly I think the best use for this in the near future is to give cargo starships a fucking huge payload capacity and to do fast 3 month crew starship trips, all on hohhmann trajectories with aerobraking.

>>11855769
That sounds pretty good. How does this shit work exactly?

>>11855904
That's the same basic pattern even further out, stretching delta-V budgets to enable bigger or faster transfers, and of course the sail works as a brake coming home.

>>11855909
Set up two pairs of superconducting coils on the front of your ship and use them to induce a rotating magnetic field in the surrounding solar wind plasma, like a magsail hundreds of km wide with a tiny mass budget.

>>11855926
What’s the mass budget even used for?

>>11855967
Coils and a power source and that's about it. Even the 30m version is under 10 tons including power supply.

>>11855833
This is how it's going to be for everyone going forward. Launch windows will become instantaneous everywhere.

>>11855819
Yes, but with 20 times less acceleration than originally expected (after that article) you need about 904 days just to reach fucking helopause with 400 km/s wind (measured if starting from 1 AU).
And if you try to cheat with one of the coronal holes you can get to a whooping 464791.667 m/s. Interstellar travel times still suck because of that difference.

rocketlab ceo on ploddit
printfag asks if he plans to proont more electron parts
ceo says no, we only use it for practical reasons
kek'd

>>11856040
Btfo

>>11856040
Poor little proontanon.

>>11856010
It was never an interstellar drive even assuming 700km/s.

It's boring lately. Someone needs to launch a surprise manned mission to the Moon.

>>11855999
Suddenly mass drivers seem to be a better option.

>>11856065
Could have made things a little more approachable. It's still pretty good for small probes, of course.

>>11856072
Elon should do a moon sample return mission. Then auction off the samples.

>>11856079
Why, he’s a billionaire and he’ll be getting to the Moon before this decade is out

>>11856079
>"$30million going once, twice, SOLD to the tubby asian gentlemen in the back"

I’m just still in disbelief that SpaceX got selected to make an Artemis lander. Will Elon make a lot of them or will he eventually try to get Jim to use actual Starships that can be returned to Earth

>>11856088
Maybe that's part of the reason they won it, at least if nasa bails on the lander there won't be much fallout.
At least it's something different for spacex to wet their beak with anyway.

>>11856084
Because it will be an event and eventually a shitshow of internet comments. The armchair communists will be screaming for his head. Over the display of wealth.

Though it will serve to get people interested in space, and kick oldspace into action.

Plus I want to see elon with a moon rock as jewelry.

>>11856088
Is it not a waste of money/resources for Elon to be developing an entirely different variant for Artemis? This thing looks like it isn’t made from stainless steel, has thrusters up top, etc.

>>11856108
it's not a waste when Nasa pays for it and you can take what you learned and apply it to your mainline rocket for free

>>11856110
Oh true I didn’t think of it like that. I’m sort of glad the application and selection process was private. Not only did Boeing overbid and btfo of themselves (kek), but Elon and Jim sidewinded us by telling us Starship is taking humans back to the Moon. Lmao and they announced it right before Demo-2. Elon is doing incredible things

>>11856107
>Plus I want to see elon with a moon rock as jewelry.
Why do you want him to get cancer?

>>11856115
Moon rocks don’t cause cancer.

>>11856107
>Mommy other kids have more toys than me and I don’t like that

elon taking a hit of his moon dust infused coke before a presentation

>>11855432
>unironic contolism on /sci/

When are they coming back

>>11856128
When they finish hiding Hitler portraits on the Russian side of the station.

>>11855246
and we already bought some more for just a few hundred million each.

>>11856122
Where do you think you are Earthnoid?

>>11856088
Its a goodwill gift from big Jim. Elon will be happy because its free money to dump into starship development and its an out for NASA when it starts flying so NASA can save some face since they can say they "helped" develope it. In his mind Jim was seeing a bunch of civvies landing on the moon first, sipping cocktails from the minibar watching the lunar landscape while the NASA niggernauts have to poop in bags.

>>11856108
i doubt it isn't made from stainless steel, it is probably painted. starting over would probably take too long and be too hard

>>11855095
>SRBs is mainly an American thing
SRBs on commercial launch vehicles exist to keep know-how and manufacturing chain for SLBMs and ICBMs and US haven't bought new nuclear missiles since Tridents in 1990's
you might notice French M51 SLBM is conceptually very similar to Ariane 6 boosters, which is of no coincidence
Russians don't use them because they are making plenty of gargantuan anti-ship and anti-air missiles and replacing mobile ICBMs with newer ones

>>11856088
>Will Elon make a lot of them or will he eventually try to get Jim to use actual Starships that can be returned to Earth
The lunar-specific starships make sense until a landing/launch pad is built for the regular ones. Raptors firing that close to the unmodified surface does bring up a lot of legitimate concerns, so the special configuration would be able to serve as the first wave and prep sites for the all-purpose starships.

>tfw no genetically-engineered gf born in an o'neill cylinder space colony at lagrange point 5

>>11856149
your Zeon flags sucks dude, please upgrade

>>11856108
the primary differences between the NASA moon starship and a regular one are:
>titanium dioxide paint
>big old NASA worm logo and meatball
>solar panels all the way around up top instead of deployable
>nose mounted docking port instead of leeward side
>landing thrusters
that's it
>>11856149
I just think it's astounding that a man completely independently came up with fucking Contolism to a t
we should put him in charge and then immediately kill him for the good of humanity

>>11856181
you can just call it Side 1, anon

>>11856192
also
> no heatshield
> no aerosurfaces

>>11856197
right

good to see that /m/ is here

>>11856128
August 2nd I believe is the plan right now.

>>11856112
Now his tin cans just need to stop dying to haste and negligence.
It‘s frustrating to see two working prototypes in a row die to issues not related to the design itself.

So when's the next SN5 test? They just did a bit of testing today.

so which are your favorite lunar lander candidates selected by nasa?

>>11855436
Kek this would be hilarious

>>11856179
>Raptors firing that close to the unmodified surface does bring up a lot of legitimate concerns, so the special configuration would be able to serve as the first wave and prep sites for the all-purpose starships.
Those holes on the sides are the ones they'll use for landing

>>11856295
I just hope these unfortunate failures at least lead to useful data
>>11856318
National team is fucking STUPID. I hate the idea of leaving half your fucking lander on the surface. Dynetics is kinda cool, I don’t like how it ditches its fuel tanks and litters the moon but it looks very kerbal. It will probably be rendered useless by starship, which is by far the coolest one
>>11856325
I believe that anon was talking about trying to land a “normal” starship on the moon. The normal starship doesn’t have those engines way high up so it might kick up a shitload of dust

>>11856318
Dynetics kek

>>11856318
CRASHER
R
A
S
H
E
R
TANKS

nooooo you can't just eject your fuel tanks!

>>11855127
For something the apparent size of the moon in a 400km orbit, it needs to be 3.4km long

>>11854768
Landing, maybe, coming back, not really

>>11855137
Right now for the rovers, NASA uses a 24h clock where the seconds, minutes and hours are 3% longer than the Earth equivalents. It has the advantage of keeping a nice 24-hour day, but other than that it's completely retarded, especially if using the same name for the Martian and Earth units

>>11856338
>littering the moon

Nigger tier

>>11856349
Based

SCOTLAND
FOREVER
https://youtu.be/mBjlivHqTHU

When will y’all take the dynetics pill. NASA is just using it as collateral for when the Chinese establish a moon base of their own. They can dump the fuel tanks over the chinese colony, and when the CPC complains we can just call them hippocrites and bring up their villager pillager cancer rockets

>>11856389
By the time chinks reach the moon they'll be paying for admission or be shot down by uparmored railgun starships, anon

>>11856149
>>11856187
Can we not have gay weeb shit for once pls?

>>11856410
Gundam is purely heterosexual and you are a lesser man for dismissing it

>>11856414
Mecha shit is super cringe, I have literally no idea how you people can bring yourselves to watch it. Code Geass being the sole exception.

>>11856425
the magic space robots are cool
code gayass was full of super cringe political bullshit that made no sense

>>11856426
Underage b&

>>11856432
I don't have time to watch 50 episodes of bad anime right now, I'm sorry that I cannot engage you in your shitty /m/ slapfight
I hope Elon drops a colony on you

>>11856425
Gundam is the only thing close to relevant because it's actually got a fleshed out world outside of its use of mobile suits as a contrivance. And most conflicts come to a serious head with shit like nukes and chemical weapons, weaponized O'neill cylinders and asteroids, and giant reflector arrays.

>>11856442
also Char is eminently quotable

When did this general become infested with mechakiddies? Gross.

>>11856458
Try saying something about space instead of baiting next time.

>>11856212
SIDES and lunar cities not martian colonies and SEDITION ok. praise earth sphere

>>11856462
Anime about magic robots is not on topic either just because it has a space theme, there is a whole fucking board for that autistic shit.

>>11856475
>Try saying something about space instead of baiting next time.

>>11855432
>live on the orbit of Earth

i fucking hate it when shills write a long message but fail to check it for errors

we already live on the orbit of earth

>>11856414
I just saw the KM flag and didn't know it was from a show. Assuming that it's Japanese and since it picks it's inspiration from WWII Axis powers, I'm very inclined to say that it's probably the wet propaganda soaked dream of some far right japs who can't move on, even considering the massive industrial boom they had from the 70s on.

The "weeb" wasn't even directed to the Japanese aspect, but rather fuckheads who get a hardon when they hear the word panzer and defend the concept of shitty battleships

>>11856494
>I'm very inclined to say that it's probably the wet propaganda soaked dream of some far right japs who can't move on

No that was GATE, which is fucking kino btw.

>>11856506
>No that was GATE
Ok, I have no idea what that means and you will understand, that I'm not looking it up because I have no reason whatsoever to expect anything from it, that varies from what I described. If it's an Anime it probably also has terrible pacing and awkward social scenes.

>>11855205
>Imagine SLS with RP1

>Two Chinese launches coming up fast.
>[July 3rd @ 03:10 UTC] Long March 4C carrying a 'multi-mode' optical Gaofen Earth observation satellite from Taiyuan
>[July 4th @ 23:45 UTC] Shiyan Weixing-6 (02) experimental satellite on a Long March 2D from Jiuquan

>>11855223
SLS block 2 could launch Skylab 2, next big space telescope, direct Saturn/Jupiter missions and beyond.
It has biggest fairing ever.

>Vega delayed until NET mid August
oh no no no

>>11856602
China also has two launches between July 8 and July 11
>LM-3B w/ APStar-6D comsat from Xichang
>1st flight of the long awaited KZ-11 rocket from Jiuquan

>>11856605
>Because of weather
I'll take "ridiculous BS" for a thousand, Alex.

>>11856603
If it exists one day

>>11856603
>"advanced boosters"
>Implying it'll ever exist
They dumped Pyrios, which could have given them that payload capability out of the gate, claiming it was "too powerful". What makes you think some vague "advanced booster" to be decided upon is going to deliver on that shit as long they're tied down to a turd core stage?

How hard is it to build a space elevator on the Moon, to launch masses of regolith into orbit, where we can build rotating cylinders with thick walls to protect against radiation?

>>11856637
Why would you build a space elevator on a rock that barely has gravity? You can yeet shit off it with a half pipe and running speed almost.

>>11856603
>SLS Block 1
>FH ballpark performance for the price of the F9 and FH programs combined
kek
>SLS Block 2
via what fucking magic is this supposed to exist, considering it appears to run on the same fucking hydrolox expander cycle engines

>>11856645

OK, even better then. We need regolith-ships to colonize the solar system.

>>11856646
They were actually making most powerful engines in history in 60s.
http://www.astronautix.com/a/aj-260.html

>>11856645
You're running at 2.38km/s?
>>11856637
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_space_elevator
Doable from a material point of view (it doesn't require fancy stuff like carbon nanotubes). It needs to be quite long though, more than 60,000km.

>>11856674
Contain your autism and read up on the concept of hyperbole.

>>11856332
Starship looks like it's about to tip-over at any moment

>>11856674
The problem with a space elevator on the moon isn't that you can't make it, it's that it's just kind of irrelevant. Same with any space elevator anywhere, really. Even if you could make one on Earth (which would require magic), a fully running Starship infrastructure would make render its capacity insignificant. Put it on the Moon or anywhere with a reasonable escape velocity and that only becomes more true.

>>11856637

Mass driver would probably be more economical.

>>11856684

>Even if you could make one on Earth (which would require magic), a fully running Starship infrastructure would make render its capacity insignificant.

I highly doubt that. Starship is going to be cheap, but not THAT cheap. Even if Starship approaches airplane economics, space elevator would be like road truck or rail. We dont fly stuff by plane if we can use truck/rail.

>>11855432
>and I fear we may start to regress...

Colonizing other planets will not slow this process; biotech will save us if legalfags don't get in the way

Read up on relaxed selection and pseudogenes

>hurricanes
>earthquakes
>volcanoes
Other rocky worlds in the Solar System are so boring compared to the Earth.

>>11856700
Simple, don’t attract legalfags’ attention
We just be careful to get stuff for our experiments
Drug runners do that all the time along with violence, us performing medical experiments would be less of a hassle to hide than that

>>11855484
The ad is laughably ironic since it is literally rhetoric, spoken by a company with (compared to their most obvious competitors) little results.

>>11856699
A space elevator has to go a long way relatively slowly. A rocket, especially a rocket on the Moon or Mars, can make a short hop then turn around and be refueled and be ready to go again. It's irrelevant on throughput alone - you can't replace a pipeline with a straw even no matter how cheap you make the straw. The rocket also has insignificant construction time and production cost in comparison.

>>11855432
>>11856700
>>11856709
Fuck off retarded /pol/ LARPers. Also, everything you discount Mengeles dream about doing biotech-wise, China is already funding somewhere in a secret lab.

Societally, a Mars colony will be everything you hate and I delight at the thought of watching /pol/fags seethe while the rest of us enjoy an actual human settlement in space.

>>11856712

>A space elevator has to go a long way relatively slowly.

Thats not a problem if the cargo is not time sensitive.

>It's irrelevant on throughput alone - you can't replace a pipeline with a straw even no matter how cheap you make the straw.

Just like you can make multiple rockets, you can make multiple elevators.

>The rocket also has insignificant construction time and production cost in comparison.

But also much smaller throughput. Cost per kg to orbit could be much better for elevators.

>>11856719
kek this guy used my point as a gravitational slingshot into schizoland

just because you don't believe in biology doesn't mean it isn't real, and just because i do doesn't mean i don't believe in interplanetary colonization

get some sunlight anon

Upgrade time boys.

>>11853986
>>11854001
it's coming back:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/10/can-a-robot-cut-metal-in-space-we-may-find-out-next-year/
And there's supposed to test part of it this year by having a robot arm cut up a tank without making too many debris.

>>11856684
>>11856699
>>11856712
>>11856721
>space elevators
Where my Orbital Ring CHADS at?

>>11856721
>That's not a problem
Yeah, it is. Your payload turnarounds on a lunar elevator are measured in weeks, and the lead time and input capital to make more will always be ridiculously higher than making more rockets. Throughput will absolutely be higher on rockets.

>>11854965
You can potentially make ceramic rocket engines using a printer that's cheaper than a good mill. It's not going to be easy though.
>>11855025
fat chance of that happening any time soon

>>11856748

>Your payload turnarounds on a lunar elevator are measured in weeks, and the lead time and input capital to make more will always be ridiculously higher than making more rockets.

It may be justified if the cargo is not time sensitive and cost per kg ends up much lower in the end. Like habitat shielding mass.

>Throughput will absolutely be higher on rockets.

Nope, just compare throughput of planes vs trains.

canadarm makes me laugh
imagine that being the sum total of your country's contribution to spaceflight

>>11856684
>> it's that it's just kind of irrelevant.
the propellant ain't free.
>>11856712
container ships are much slower than airplanes, but much cheaper. Although if you really want throughput, you put a mass driver on the Moon.
https://space.nss.org/l5-news-mass-driver-update/
600,000 tons a year to L-5 at a buck per pound is something starship will have trouble beating.

>>11856108
>This thing looks like
It's CGI.
It is supposed to be a real starship, the biggest difference is the thrusters.
And I'm not even sure it's the final design.

>>11856761
I don't know how worth it is to keep pointing out the same thing. You don't seem to recognize what throughput is.

>>11856777

Throughput: transported mass per unit of time.

Most likely higher for elevators, for the same price.

>>11856773
>the propellant ain't free
Bottlenecks gonna bottleneck. Time isn't free.
>mass drivers
Mass drivers don't have any of the issues elevators do. I don't see any issue with them on an airless world.

>>11856746
Ring of Iron when?

>>11856773

>It is now believed that a lunar mass driver several kilometers long, designed conservatively with present technology, should be able to deliver 600,000 tons a year to L-5, or more easily to L-2, at a cost of about $1 per pound

Damn, thats O'Neill Cylinder territory.

>>11856785
You would have to move tens of thousands of tons with each load to match a small rocket fleet operating over the same time. I don't think any space elevator conceptualized is moving that much, and the rockets scale much easier.

>>11856746

>Orbital Ring meme

The only remotely realistic space elevator concept is Launch Loop.

Would LiH6 make good rocket fuel?

>>11856794
An Orbital Ring is literally just a Launch Loop that runs around the entire planet.

>>11856793

What "load" are you talking about? A well utilized space elevator is pretty much a continuous stream of container sized payloads. You would need one hell of a rocket fleet to deliver a comparable mass stream to orbit.

>>11856797

Yup, hence much less realistic. Launch Loop is comparable to today's largest structures and could be feasibly built. Orbital Ring is a megastructure in a true sense of the word, in the Dyson Swarm territory.

>>11856794

How much cheaper/simpler would Launch Loop on the Moon be?

>>11856800
I don't know what concept you're parroting because that's not how space elevators work. You can only get away with a few elevators at once and they would be light even compared to a single Starship.

>>11856785
It would depend on the total carrying capacity of the elevator. An Earth elevator would have a hard time just supporting its own weight, now add a pipeline of hundreds of cars going up or down. Because what would be the point if you can only support one car, and it takes weeks to crawl up or down? And how hard is it to have them going in both directions at the same time? It wouldn't be good if you have to wait for the entire thing to clear so that you can send stuff the other way, and Bob help you if one gets stuck.
A lunar or martian elevator would have a lot more capacity when made from the same materials, but it would still have a limit to the total capacity.

>>11856807

>You can only get away with a few elevators at once and they would be light even compared to a single Starship.

That depends on the material (tensile strength) of the elevator.

>>11855025
https://www.google.com/search?q=metal+printers&client=safari&rls=en&source=univ&tbm=shop&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi-18eypqzqAhUDhHIEHVzOBwgQsxh6BAgPECs

>>11856817
And therefore? You could increase the capacity by a couple of orders of magnitude by assuming magic for all it really matters, rockets still come out on top.

>>11856822
>rockets still come out on top.
Not when comparing cost, an elevator would be able to lift stuff for one hundredth the price.

>>11856762
Darm is German for colon.

>>11856827
Which brings us right around to the original argument now that you realize the problem with the one you've been making. Bottlenecks still gonna bottleneck. A space elevator could provide a nominal cost of a cent per kg for all it matters, they can't handle the vast majority of demand.

>>11856762
sorry aboot that, eh

What's most sci fi looking spacecraft? For me its M-19.

>>11856762
Just wait until the Canastation comes online. However, be sure to not dock with the Quebec module.

>>11856860
the x33 is clearly the most scifi spacecraft that has ever actually been worked on

>>11856837
>they can't handle the vast majority of demand.
build more elevators

>>11856425
Chicks dig giant robots, anon.

>>11856731
You spelled 'rhetoric' wrong.

>>11856820
They're still 15x too expensive.

>>11856762
That's honestly one of the most important part.
It was necessary in every aspect of building the ISS and in the far future where propellant will forever need to be save we will venerate whoever build the best space arms, capable of grabbing & moving spaceship to the docking, build and maintain entire station.

>>11856699
Space elevators are estimated at tens of dollars per kilogram to orbit, anon. Starship is actually in the same ballpark.

>>11856761
Hmmm, 100 tons of payload per month via elevator, or 150 tons of payload every 5 hours?

>>11856796
Seems it probably requires pressures measured in GPa in order to exist, so I'd say no.

>>11856827
>an elevator would be able to lift stuff for one hundredth the price
Not according to the experts who estimate that a space elevator would cost tens of dollars per kilogram delivered.

>>11856982
Ring the entire moon in them. By the time you're done, if you haven't capsized yourself in construction costs which you certainly aren't making back on launch revenue, you'll be providing less than 1% of demand because it's been a couple of hundred years and there are most likely multiple fleets of many thousands of rockets and other shit like mass drivers flinging shit off of the moon all up to the tune of millions of tons/month.

>>11857105
Replied to entirely the wrong post, meant >>11856917

>>11857105
>ring the entire moon in PROONTers

I don't understand Kayne but whatever

>>11857125
>The year is 2225, BO is finishing its first printed space elevator concept, Mars has been turned into a giant orion engine and 4ASS is still figuring out propolox

>>11856762

>>11857140
>"dammit anon stop dipping frogs in the LOX tank and selling them as popsicles to kids outside, we've already had to call poison control twice"

>>11857138
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vn2xrSG24w

>>11856347
>landing maybe, coming back, not really
yes, they'd have to send probably 5 or 6 falcon heavies in total though

>>11856410
Based, but the green looks better desu

>>11856664
>>11856646
>>11856603
even if SLS block 2 is created, the 18 meter starship will be ready by then

>>11857059
If elon can actually get starship down to 13.333/kilogram, then starship is better. We'll see.

>>11857303
It took 10 years to make Dragon 2 fly crew.

>>11857312
dragon 2 was restricted by NASA regulations, starship won't

>>11857155
>fly us closer, I want to hit them with our ax
I miss that show

>>11857312
they will also have a shit ton more money to pour into development of starship crew because of starlink

>The further development of the idea has lead recently to the ”air-spike” concept implemented in two different ways by Myrabo1 and Tretjakov, et al. The air spike can be formed by concentrated energy (an electric arc plasma torch in the Myrabo’s case, a repetitive-pulse laser beam in the case of Tretjakov et al., see Fig.2b) projected forward off a moving body producing a ”tunnel” of low density reduced pressure hot air in the shape of a paraboloid of revolution. Such a ”spike” has important advantages over a structural spike due to the fact that air density behind the blast wave is lower than that behind the shock wave. The level of the drag reduction in the supersonic M=2.0 flow can reach 50% of the baseline drag. The effect depends also on the relative ”hot spot” position with respect to the body, the ”hot” spot size, and M number of the free stream

putting lasers on rocket noses to reduce drag when?

>>11856789
never, until we free our souls from the tug of earth's gravity

bring it back bros

>>11857208

>>11857493
same

so Starship is ika-chan
I nominate Cirno as the mascot for the Super Heavy booster

>>11857208
Didn't the guy who has Pepe Gagarin put him in a freezer to calm him down? Or was that someone else?

>>11857512

>>11857512
>>11857517
Cirno is the Falcon 9.

redpill me on VASIMR
on a scale of 1 to LANTR how much of a meme is it

>>11857512
No, Starship is Meta Cooler because he's shiny.

bros
are we gonna make it to mars before he croaks

>>11857586
LANTR is significantly less of a meme than VASIMR. Even if VASIMR worked 100% as advertised it would be useless.

>On May 21, 1962, Armstrong was involved in the "Nellis Affair". He was sent in an F-104 to inspect Delamar Dry Lake in southern Nevada, again for emergency landings. He misjudged his altitude and did not realize that the landing gear had not fully extended. As he touched down, the landing gear began to retract; Armstrong applied full power to abort the landing, but the ventral fin and landing gear door struck the ground, damaging the radio and releasing hydraulic fluid. Without radio communication, Armstrong flew south to Nellis Air Force Base, past the control tower, and waggled his wings, the signal for a no-radio approach. The loss of hydraulic fluid caused the tailhook to release, and upon landing, he caught the arresting wire attached to an anchor chain, and dragged the chain along the runway.[52]

>It took thirty minutes to clear the runway and rig another arresting cable. Armstrong telephoned Edwards and asked for someone to collect him. Milt Thompson was sent in an F-104B, the only two-seater available, but a plane Thompson had never flown. With great difficulty, Thompson made it to Nellis, where a strong crosswind caused a hard landing and the left main tire suffered a blowout. The runway was again closed to clear it, and Bill Dana was sent to Nellis in a T-33, but he almost landed long. The Nellis base operations office then decided that to avoid any further problems, it would be best to find the three NASA pilots ground transport back to Edwards.[52]

>>11857586
>>11857647
Look at >>11853183 pic related. High exhaust velocity/specific impulse equals low thrust because 2 x rocket power = exhaust velocity x thrust. Only way to get around this is to put in literally atomic bomb levels of energy into your engine every second.

>>11857643
if we make it there in 2024 maybe

>All of the delays resulted in Shepard lying on his back in the capsule for almost three hours, by which point he complained to the blockhouse crew that he had a severe need to urinate (because the mission would last under 20 minutes, nobody had thought to equip the Mercury with a urine collection device). The crew told him that this was impossible as they would have to set the White Room back up and waste considerable amounts of time removing the Mercury's heavily bolted hatch. An irate Shepard then announced that if he could not get out for a bathroom trip, he would simply urinate in his suit. When the blockhouse protested that that would short out the medical electrodes on his body, he told them to simply turn the power off. They complied, and Shepard emptied his bladder. Because of the position he was sitting in, the urine pooled somewhat underneath his back and with oxygen flowing through the spacesuit, he was soon dried out, and the countdown resumed.[18]

>>11857701
Nuclear Salt Water Rocket and Nuclear Pulse Propulsion (orion drive) are the only things that get around this. Fusion concepts exist, but we don't have fusion now so it is best not to rely on non-existing technologies.

>>11856603
>SLS block 2

OwO whats down here???

>>11857734
NSWR is a nonexistent technology because there is no material even remotely close to being capable as a nozzle for a continuous nuclear explosion. Its a big a pipe dream as fusion at the moment, especially considering the retarded amount of fissile material you need, which also applies to orion drive.

>bro just carry tens of thousands of tonnes of nuclear bombs

>>11857756
fucking furries

what the fuck is going on with iapetus

>>11857756
Source for photo.

>>11857766
https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA13518

>>11857756
Oh shit, it's him.

>>11857757
>NSWR is a nonexistent technology because there is no material even remotely close to being capable as a nozzle for a continuous nuclear explosion. Its a big a pipe dream as fusion at the moment, especially considering the retarded amount of fissile material you need, which also applies to orion drive.
source? I see a lot of people making these claims, and very rarely do they provide anything to back up their claims

>>11857765
how the fuck did this happen

>>11857756
>>11857772
I wonder what could have caused it.

>>11857701
That's why I think sail tech of some kind is going to be used, either as raw solar or as a beamed power target. Put the nuclear reactions somewhere else.

>>11857312
it's been 20 years and sls still hasn't flow. and they started with all the parts done.

bruh its a fucking frosted walnut

>>11857756
me

>>11857781
>>11857800
*BONK*

>>11857800
Ravioli ravioli, the fuck is this moonioli?

>>11857757
Orion can get away with ridiculously low mass ratios, you only need tens of thousands of tonnes of nuclear bombs if you want to make a ship tens of thousands of tonnes heavy.
>the retarded amount of fissile material you need
Only if you're dumb enough to use Uranium as your fissile material. Bruh. TWO (!) Russian breeder reactors alone produce like 20 tonnes of Plutonium a year. You need less than 10kg to build a nuke. There are literally millions of tonnes of Uranium accessible to us right now, all of which can be turned into Plutonium.

Take the nuclear pill, anon.

>>11857777
What fucking source do you want me to provide? If you can show me a material that maintains structural coherency under a sustained nuclear assault I think the military will be interested in talking to you and you could probably win a Nobel prize in material science too.

>>11857812
>you only need tens of thousands of tonnes of nuclear bombs if you want to make a ship tens of thousands of tonnes heavy.

That pusher plate is going to be megatonnes no matter how you swing it if you don't want your crew fried.

bro

why the FUCK have we still not been to psyche

>>11857824
Not really, though. The nuclear pulse can be practically whatever yield you want and a good distance away. Orion had a thin pusher plate and no dedicated shielding, wasn't any kind of autistically well tuned design and would have done just fine.

>>11857832
Year after next, anon.

>NASA has selected SpaceX of Hawthorne, California, to provide launch services for the agency’s Psyche mission. The Psyche mission currently is targeted to launch in July 2022 on a Falcon Heavy rocket from Launch Complex 39A at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida.

>The total cost for NASA to launch Psyche and the secondary payloads is approximately $117 million, which includes the launch service and other mission related costs.

>The Psyche mission will journey to a unique metal-rich asteroid, also named Psyche, which orbits the Sun between Mars and Jupiter. The asteroid is considered unique, as it appears to largely be made of the exposed nickel-iron core of an early planet – one of the building blocks of our solar system.

>>11857824
Lol what? You use sub-kiloton nukes for any reasonable design. Your nuke payload magazine alone will provide enough radiation shielding that the crew compartment won't have ANYTHING to worry about in terms of "frying the crew". If you're still unreasonable worried you can just move your crew space farther away from the engine or use a few tons of water. Not to mention that any space ship for long term missions already needs to be shielded because of cosmics rays anyways. This is literally a non-concern.

Take the nuclear pill, anon.

>>11857877
congratulations to post number 404 for again making me think the jannies had nuked the thread.

Is HTPB and potassium nitrate a good combo for solid propellant?

>>11857864
Only UK anons will get this

how did they make porkchop plots way back in the day

>>11857952
WHATS a porkchop plot

>>11857952
also what's the deal with the spikes you often see on them, like the two areas of fuckoff in this one

>>11857964
Those pinched areas are your launch window.

>>11857512
Cirno is the mascot for fairing catching.

>>11857643
No, but if it makes you feel any better, he's so senile you can probably tell him we already did and he'll believe you.

>>11857964
oh it turns out it's because of the orbital plane differences, that makes sense i guess

>>11857800
They learned from the empire and built a mountain range instead of a trench on their death star.

Any news from Boku no Chika?

>>11858089
SN5 passed ambient and cryo tests last night. Thrust simulators were removed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QbM7Vsz3kg

>>11858089
*Boca Chaika

>>11858104
imagine the smell

geosynchronous orbit is hard bros
my launchpad for an efficient vacuum engine with multiple restarts

>>11858104
what happened on /a/ that is causing half the board to visit /sfg/ today

>>11856584
this image makes me cum

>>11858122
How easy is it to do recoverable/reusable rockets in KSP RO/RP-1?

>>11858123
>today

>>11858133
at least for the last couple of threads there have been very few of the /a/fags here, really there haven't been that many since that guy got banned by the jannies