/sci/ - Science & Math

First for 53rd anniversary of the sputnik panic

first for korean astrowaifus

First for SIXTY-third anniversary of the sputnik panic, I can't count.

first for KOREAN ASTRO WAIFUS

Korea sucks at space. Even best Korea is better at it than them.

>>12198535
They actually recently got approval to develop a space launch vehicle from the US. It’s a pretty transparent cover for a much more capable domestic ballistic missile program, but America is perfectly happy to have more countries with missiles near China.

>>12198543
actually, they got permission to make solid rocket motors from the US
they've always had permission to pursue liquid rocketry

>>12198490
I suppose they could but I don't think Elon would want to allocate a superheavy and/or also a starship just to launch a small dynetics lander. And NASA would get in trouble for not using SLS
>>12198516
Ehhhhh finding her hot is like being attracted to your teacher at an all guy's school. She's only attractive because the competition around her is ugly lmao

First for the Once and Future Spaceport

>>12198547
>>12198543
With how Trump's been badgering them to pay more for their own defense we probably had to push them into paying to develop their own new launcher.

>>12198554
She is attractive and you’re a fag

The Falcon 9 for the GPS III launch has been taken horizontal.
https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1313325764545179648

>>12198585
Wonder if they'll launch Starlinks 12 and 13 both before it then

>>12198585
>The Falcon 9 for the GPS III launch has been taken horizontal
Has there been any speculation on the cause?

>>12198617
Not that I know of.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en

Help, I know that this is probably a bullshit patent by the US Navy but I don’t know enough physics to pinpoint where the bullshit specifically is

>>12198617
>Has there been any speculation on the cause?
The launch aborted at engine startup because the pressure rise was too rapid in the turbomachinery.

Is it possible to have wacky sky colors and it not be totally poisonous?

>>12198633
Like the aurora?

>>12198554
counterpoint

okay, I think I've finally finished updating both of my current rockets to the new block 30 standard
Small one can now lift an extra 550kg payload to LEO over the original design of 1000kg, big one can now lift an extra 4500kg over the original 10,000kg design, and both of them are still under the pad limits of 60 tons and 350 tons respectively

t. eron musku

>>12198653
Bitch please

>>12198653
ugly dyke with a stache

>>12198643
I mean like a sky that is not blue but purple or green or something consistently

>>12198629
Us military hasa lot of crazy sci fi patents. I can't remember the reason, but last time I checked there were no patents for the blackbird and nighthawk, probably because they existed.

>ywn go to space
It hurts

>>12198665
So I can make my own off-brand blackbird if I want?

>>12198673
>not making your own off-brand ayaks

>>12198668
>Mfw

ROAD CLOSED
>ROAD CLOSED
ROAD CLOSED

Do you guys think africa will ever develop a successful space program?

>>12198710
I don’t see why not. I legit dont understand why every country doesn’t have at least an all solid smallsat launcher they built themselves. It’s not that expensive R and D wise

>>12198714
Africans are dumb

>>12198714
Maybe because of low iq?

>>12198714
imagine browsing /sci/ and not knowing what hbd is

>>12198668
>n
But Virgin Galactic will give you a suborbital hop for only like 20,000 LINK.

>>12198663
orbiting sun with different spectrum
binary system, so that one of the suns is permanently rising or falling

orbiting red giant would probably give you purple sky
I don't think green (and breathable) is possible though

>>12198721
The Himalayan Database.

>>12198749
ah yes, it was actually sherpas who were keeping down the blax all this time. Few know this

>>12198749
that's the HDB, dipshit

>>12198663
a hotter or colder star will give you different sky colors, but with an atmosphere like earth it will always be kinda blueish relative to the color of the light
colored dust can give you some options, but on an earthlike planet it might be hard to keep dust in the air consistently and the denser the atmosphere the more raleigh scattering you have going on and the less relative effect the dust has so you probably couldnt get an atmosphere as red as mars while still having breathable pressure through that route
you can get green here on earth with thunderstorms and such, so lots of storms could do that a bit
there is probably a lot of different possible compounds that can give you different colors while not still having breathable air either through lack of toxicity or being concentrated in higher levels of the atmosphere, I can't think of any simple ones off the top of my head that would give you an interesting color but not react with oxygen in the atmosphere but I could imagine spores or other weird alien biological products in the air plausibly giving you interesting colors

>>12198779
I might genuinely be dyslectic

bros how do I attach my ksp save files to my resume

>>12198714
>I legit dont understand why every country doesn’t have at least an all solid smallsat launcher
Casting large solids (smallsat launchers qualify as large in this sense) is surprisingly difficult. It took the US and USSR quite some time to produce solid motors large and reliable enough to act as ICBMs (to the point that the Soviets were still using some hydrazine/NTO missiles on submarines into the late 80s).

If anyone knows why it’s so difficult, I’d love to learn more. I suspect it has a lot to do with the curing characteristics of large masses of solid fuel, but I honestly have no idea.

>>12198797
Stapler

>>12198804
I know APCP can be kind of a pain in the ass dealing with cracking and air bubbles and presumably even more of a pain in the ass at large scale, I dunno much about other solid propellants though

>pad clear
soon

did ya'll hear it's Ika's birthday
this is relevant due to memes

>>12198878
Are they doing a static fire on SN-8 or just a pressure test?

>>12198908
When is it Starship's birthday?

>>12198915
his birthday

>>12198797
just attach it in the email
put one or two impressive screencaps on the resume itself
it's not a brainsurgery

>>12198917
alright then

>>12198911
pressure test was yesterday, today is cryo test, idk about static fire

>>12198915
here's a handy how-to guide

>>12198933
based

So I was watching a video on the launch process for the titan ICBM I think it was and they mention there being locked valves for pipes that do fuel filling immediately prior to launch. I thought all ICBMs were solids?

Streamer said Oct. 8 would be the earliest a static fire could happen.

Are we still 3 weeks away from Starship presentation or has it moved down to 2 weeks now? I'm losing track of time these days. I wonder if we will have at least a static fire by then (It still takes around a week to install Raptors on these test vehicles, and SN8 doesn't have them yet). A test FLIGHT by then would be insane

>>12198945
Early ICBMs were liquid. Solid fuels with adequate performance and mass fractions for launch on demand roles for sufficiently sized payloads came later.

>>12198945
Early ICBMs were liquid fueled, initially kerolox, and then more storable hypergolic liquids like hydrazine/NTO. Solids were always the ideal solution, but took a bit more development to see use.

>>12198955
They are pretty much going to be doing the test flight straight after the pressure test and static fire, presumably the vehicle is ready to go minus raptors.

pictured: Starship, stealing the world's launch market

this is what Zubrin wants

>>12198982
imagine the smell under his skirt

>>12198982
Zubrin needs to dial back his aggressive autism with the whole mini starship deal. We need to move past tuna cans.

>>12198992
I think he has, he hasn't brought it up since he talked to Elon in person and Elon redpilled him on Mars

HOP

>>12198543
>>12198547

They should outsource their solid motors and any other R&D the US wants to control to Best Korea, they'd have to work together on digging tunnels though

>>12198992
I would like to propose that the current starship be renamed the 'mini-starship' and a larger, 500+ ton to LEO starship be constructed, to be named 'big starship'.

tank venting now

>>12198995
Zubrin seems intrinsically anti starship. Is it because of his love of mars direct? Wouldn't starship like, support everything zubrin has based his whole life around?? Why isn't he a starship fag himself?

>>12199023
Based

>>12199038
Low level seething over being cucked by NASA beauracrats and sh*lby and friends for thirty odd years.

I want to study Martian hydrology bros

>>12199061
I do it right now, in part, for my job. It's way more fucking BORING than you think lmao. I would rather train people to go to mars to look for hard rock (as opposed to landers, which is what I work on). Or better yet go there myself. I could literally do in a DAY what it takes perseverance a fucking year to do

I just read the literally year old news that Being scrapped the XS-1.
Wasn't that the super space plane that was supposed to BTFO Spacex in terms of re-usability?

>>12198915
I want to molest that squid.

https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4038/1
>However, while the current planetary crisis constrains us to sobriety, a number of space projects are looking the other way. Megaconstellations of satellites such as Starlink are being deployed to provide Internet access even in the most remote places on Earth, thriving on the frenetic practice of high frequency trading,

Reminder that hateful academics will try to use their poisonous influence to strangle space in its cradle.

>>12199082
Mini launch vehicles and air launch vehicles in general are incredibly gay and could never compete with a falcon 9. boeing has turned into a company of bluffing and sucking gooberment contracts in a dark alley

Rumor/speculation that Boing purposefully didn't put much effort into Starliner. Boing was expecting SpaceX to fail and that would allow Boing to gouge NASA for even more money:

>The problem is that Boeing figured that - since the client was NASA - they could get away with doing a lousy job on a milestone-based Firm Fixed Price contract and finish the milestones properly upon getting (much) additional money.
>But reality bit Boeing in the behind when NASA did NOT turn the Firm Fixed Price contract into (pseudo) Cost-Plus. Which in turn led Boeing to flying OFT while the d*rn thing was nowhere near ready to fly.
>And even after the disaster that was OFT-1 Boeing still expected that NASA would pick up the tab for the OFT re-flight. In essence, Boeing expected NASA to pay additional money so that Boeing could meet a required milestone. That is not how milestone-based Firm Fixed Price contracts work.
>Fortunaly NASA said no despite Boeing trying to convince NASA during negotiations that lasted for months.
>Boeing management fundamentally does not understand the workings and implications of a milestones-based Firm Fixed Price contract.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51346.msg2139256#msg2139256

>>12199101
>From what I have learned from various sources in the 10 months since OFT-1 is that Boeing management expected (from 2013 forward) that the Firm Fixed Price contract for CCtCAP would eventually morph into a pseude Cost-Plus contract.
>Fortunately for Commercial Crew that never happened.
>This expectation by Boeing management was based on a number of incorrect assumptions, prime being that they expected SpaceX to fail in delivering a working product for just $2.6 billion (which is exactly the thing you already mentioned). Boeing expected that SpaceX would eventually go back to NASA and ask for more money. Which in turn would open the door for Boeing going to NASA and asking for more money.
>Quite frankly I find it amazing that Boeing expected SpaceX to fail, given the track-record SpaceX had by then (2013), courtesy of COTS and CRS phase 1.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51346.msg2139381#msg2139381

https://old.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/j5yt0l/rumor_boeing_didnt_put_much_effort_into_starliner/

>>12199038
he died on his hill, anon
there's nothing left

tank farm is venting, SN8 is looking frosty

>>12199082
they took the governments money, told them what they wanted was impossible, asked for money, and then told the government to fuck off

>>12199101
Literally BIG it true, holy shit

>>12199113
unfortunately, it's false
it's not that Boeing wasn't taking it seriously
it's that they fucked it up, and then told themselves they weren't taking it seriously as a cope

>>12199109
Boeing after getting a contract, going over budget and over deadline, and asked if they currently have any results
https://youtu.be/8QxIIz1yEsA

>>12199091
These parasites have been going at it for decades but their power is primarily over small fry which spacex currently isn't. Better watch out for any creative legislators and political whores waving around any flags these nutjobs create to rally retards.

>>12199129
>"In the context of economic restrictions combined with all kinds of instabilities and difficulties resulting from the environmental crisis, a redefinition of priorities is likely to be needed towards Earth observation applications at the detriment of other applications. Of course, the interest of various scientific missions remains relevant and fighting climate change should not stop us in our quest for knowledge.

Notice what he does there? "Oh on you can't have cheap satellite internet or space colonization, but i can still get paid six figures to make autistically over-engineered academic projects for Ariane that never see thel ight of day"

This guy is very well educated, but he has done fuck all to actually advance the wrold he wants. Which,from some of these quotes,sounds unironically like an ecofascist global dictatorship. Also,he lives in France right now, but he never once brings up using nuclear power as one part of solving climate change. He's a typical case of a person with a good mind for science but who is gullible and easily swayed into ultraradical politics.

>>12199101
>>12199102
kek

https://www.boeing.com/features/2020/09/aiming-for-the-stars.page
lmao

>>12199141
I don't think it's even that malevolent, most of these people are just very well educated grifters regardless of politics. The fact that grifting thrives especially under authoritarian bureaucracy is I believe why they tend to be so open to it.

>>12199149
stunning and brave

SN9 completed in time for display at the Starship presentation, with SN8 being crashed into the ocean at the end of its 15km hop?

>>12199101
>Fortunaly NASA said no despite Boeing trying to convince NASA during negotiations that lasted for months.
>Boeing management fundamentally does not understand the workings and implications of a milestones-based Firm Fixed Price contract.
They do, they just relied on age-old tactics of nonstop whining until you get your way. Which could have worked (and they expected it to) had they no real competition in the face of spacex.

>>12199162
If the hop does not involve belly flop its unlikely they'll be crashing it (willingly).

launch thread up early because I'm off to bed. not like it's gonna launch anyways lmao, scrub incoming amirght
>>12199180

haha rockets go fwooosh

>>12199091
> An important questioning needs to be done within the space community on the priorities it should consider when allocating money and efforts, at the dawn of the second decade of “The century of threats” as Jacques Blamont puts it [16], the founder and former scientific and technical director of the French space agency (CNES).

She is French but fuck me, this is some of the worst prose I've ever read in the English language. Apart from that I'd rate this as a mediocre essay from a run of the mill masters student. Every man and their aunt thinks they are being really smart right now by saying we need more earth observation satellites - but just how many more do we bloody need!? Imagine the vast processing demands of the petabytes of data that will be pulled down daily and the co2 created thereby. I never see mention of that. She also says something along the lines of 'it's pointless attempting to fix the earth by going to space because we don't have enough time' but then also admits the impact of it is minimal - so then what do we have to lose by trying? Finally it's hugely ironic that she manages to include a backhander to the only organisation that is pursuing a more sustainable model via reusability in the shape of SpaceX, whilst failing to criticise the massive wastefulness of for example Arianespace. For a people that pride themselves on refinement etc frogs are often remarkably crude

>>12199141
I thought it was a he judging by his girly name

>>12199073
Hands-on investigation and surveying would be a million times better

>>12199220
Fuck she not he

>>12199073
From Steve Squyres, lead scientist on Spirit and Opportunity:
>What Spirit and Opportunity have done in 5 1/2 years on Mars, you and I could have done in a good week.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1313284721426796546?s=20

bros when the fuck are we gonna get another good solar storm like 2003
I want to see aurora down in california again, I was too young to properly appreciate it back then

>It was determined that the chain of events that led to the spacecraft's loss began with its inertial reference unit (IRU) reporting a rotation of 21.7 degrees per hour at 19:10 UTC on 25 March, though the vehicle was actually stable. The attitude control system attempted to use Hitomi's reaction wheels to counteract the non-existent spin, which caused the spacecraft to rotate in the opposite direction. Because the IRU continued to report faulty data, the reaction wheels began to accumulate excessive momentum, tripping the spacecraft's computer into taking the vehicle into "safe hold" mode. Attitude control then tried to use its thrusters to stabilise the spacecraft; the sun sensor was unable to lock on to the Sun's position, and continued thruster firings caused Hitomi to rotate even faster due to an incorrect software setting. Because of this excessive rotation rate, early on 26 March several parts of the spacecraft broke away, likely including both solar arrays and the extended optical bench.[8][21]
now this is ksp
>RCS STUCK

>>12198585
>>12198617
>>12198632
Wasn't the F9 first stage for this mission brand new too?

Did the Starlink launch get scrubed?

>>12199347
no everything looks good

>>12199347
mission audio went live ~5 minutes ago

starlink launch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMWu-mspYuw

soon :^)

HYPERGOLICS ONLY TO ORBIT

Launch will be scrubbed

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>not scrubbed

>T+45 seconds
could still be a scrub don't get your hopes up

>>12199403
T+3:30
They could still scrub

>>12199408
No it's scrubbed, close the thread, stop the general, go to bed, give up

It's gonna land in that wind? The barge is rocking around

Lame, I want an explosion.

>>12199419
Landed right on the fucking dot.

FAGGOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTS
The superior rocket remains winner

>ULA still hasn't launched

ULA sniper is saving his ammo for the 15km hop.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2020/10/05/nro-reveals-plans-for-previously-undisclosed-launch-with-spacex-this-month/

>New spacex launch
>Previously undisclosed
>NROL-108
>NET 25 October
>RTLS at LZ-1

>>12199482
It will launch before ULA

>>12199493
At this rate, we'll have the HOP before ULA gets off the ground.

>>12199445
With ammo prices the way they are, that's probably a good idea.

>>12198507
>that
>waifu material

>>12198668
You can go to the edge of space in an airplane.
Not quite the same as planting the stars and stripes on Europa, but it'll still do.

>>12199482
its zuma's replacement

>>12199526
>he thinks zuma failed
kek

Thank you based God for making this the timeline I get to live in.

>>12199536
Since most satellites are visible can't people just check if it's doing anything in orbit?

>>12199545
>https://www.boeing.com/features/2020/09/aiming-for-the-stars.page
I appreciate the effort that some guy went through to take this picture.

Did Spacex accidentally reveal the sat detachment method?

>>12199623
No, they've done it numerous times already.

>>12199623
You mean this? (from some previous launch)

>>12199616
I wouldn't like to blame all of starliners failures on her, because that's obviously pretty retarded and shes probably legit.
But it says something when Boeing is glorifying this woman despite the program around her failing. They're making the same mistake that is all too common these days; they care more about WHO is doing the work than whether the work gets done.

>>12199562
>invisibility cloaking

>>12199101
>Fortunaly NASA said no despite Boeing trying to convince NASA during negotiations that lasted for months.
But didn't nasa give them an extra 200 million after the first delay?

>>12199641
In her position I'd be kind of embarrassed. I'm partially sighted but would be pretty aggrieved at some kind of patronising 'but he achieved in spite of his handicap' pat on the head, and pointing out of my difference.

>>12199689
Yup, tho they are having to pay for the new starliner test out of pocket (410 million).

there is a launch stream vtuber. holy shit

>>12199731
Link now!

>>12199736
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaYjxxYE2Eg
Follow her on twitter @clearRusui

>>12199744
She cute
Cool twatter too

>>12199751
sorry https://twitter.com/clearusui

>>12199753
Apology accepted
Don't let it happen again

>>12199731
Is space finally becoming PopSci again?

>>12199775
Always has been.

>>12199775
that's actually good because we need the public interest we need for congress to spend more on space.

>>12199782
Where we're going we don't need (((congress))). Hope NASA is rendered useless by starship unless they are smart enough to never do business with subcontracting SHITS ever again. Idk how congress will justify needed SLS when Starship can do more for 1/1000th the price

>>12199689
bad boy boeing, you dont get the billion dollar prize, you get the billion dollar punishment!

>>12199120
kek

>>12199623
It's called Yeet Spin.

https://spacenews.com/spacex-launches-starlink-satellites-as-it-deorbits-original-ones/

Viasat? More like ViaSeething amirite.

>>12198710
SpaceX is african

>>12199545
Same desu

>>12199101
>>12199102
Imagine if SpaceX had failed, and Boeing's Starliner is the new standard for American spacecraft development. "Space is hard" would be honestly accepted as memories of Apollo fade away.

>>12199853
that's what for all mankind should have been about

>>12199839
lmao they're definitely going bankrupt. wont 100% of starlink satellites be purposely deorbited after 5 years? starlink failure rate 100% gottem

>>12199839
>NOOOOOOOO 7% OF YOUR SATELLITES ARE FAILING
Ok, we’ll launch more
>AHHHHHHHHHH

>>12199839
>deorbiting sats that were never intended to be part of the functional fleet
>spin it into this
The space industry literally runs on cope at this point, it's hilarious

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1313462965778157569

starlink beta almost here

>>12199875
>>12199839
>SpaceX says failure rate is less than 1%
>but we think the failure rate is 7%
>therefore the failure rate is 22%
What did they mean by this?

>>12199744
The future's so bright I gotta wear shades.

>>12199858
A show about an alternate present where oldspace continues its course? With the few visionaries left desperately fighting against a rigged system, and becoming disillusioned? Where the look to stars, and see nothing of interest?

>>12199895

>>12199895
>failure rate is less than 1% but 60 of the existing sats are part of a test batch that is being actively deorbited
>we think the failure rate is 7% because we don't know what a test batch is
>we take this erroneous conclusion and assume it represents 7% failures every few months over the lifetime of the program
the thought process is actually hilarious in how retarded it is

>>12199900
it's a dystopian tale

>>12199744
>my worlds are colliding again
https://twitter.com/Artia_Hololive/status/1266869429922484224

>>12199920
what do they hope to gain? frequencies???

>>12199939
>look FCC, the sky is falling down i swear
seems plausible

How would /sfg/ build an O’Neill cylinder using today’s infrastructure?
Launch 2 starships, go ass to ass then wet workshop that bitch after welding them together?

>>12199960
>How would /sfg/ build an O’Neill cylinder using today’s infrastructure?
literally impossible due to scale

>>12199939
Anything to slow down starlink. The chances of the FCC giving up bandwidth from SpaceX are almost none. Viashit is mad because SpaceX is taking names and kicking ass in the same service category as them, so they want to do anything they can to slow the advancement of starlink.
Musk already has tremendous momentum, and doing controlled deorbits of all the 0.9 starlink hardware is just icing on the cake, if not a massive chad move against all other internet-satellite companies.
No one else is even CLOSE to what SpaceX and Starlink have already done, and while everyone else is tripping along taking their time and crying about it, spacex/starlink is gaining momentum.

>>12199960
god i hate popsci

>>12200007
talk about disruption, and they're using starlink sats as a platform for dod sats as well. industry on suicide watch

>>12200007
Ole Musky has got them by the balls and no matter what happens SL looks like it's here to stay

>>12200046
it's like viasat is trying to piss off the US military

>>12198659
mommy

>>12200046
They had 10 years to change their business model from when F9 was introduced to now. They didn't change it.

>>12200007
>less than a year
>SpaceX de-orbits more prototype sats than most companies have even put up
>oldspace/oldsat unable to cope
>REEEEEEEE SPACEX IS FAILING

>>12200046
Time for a big fat federal subsidy to support our American communication service providers!

>>12198554
>>12199518
That is what the average Asian woman looks like. Weebs are so out of touch with reality.

>>12200088
With any luck they'll go bankrupt and assets sold off. They're glorified antenna makers now. I wish Bezos would get off his bald ass and compete for fucks sake, I see no other threat to Starlink's market

>>12200092

>>12198934
Any eta yet for the test flight + belly flop maneuver?

>>12198710
Congo has a space programme. They haven't made it to space yet though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troposphere_(rocket_family)

>>12200109
I thought Italians were hairy greezers.

>>12199381
VERY based

>>12199526
>>12199536
>haha awww shit guys we lost the payload again, that suuucks lmao wink wink

>>12199960
Wet workshop is a meme. You can't just easily convert a fuel tank into livable space while in orbit. The effort required would make it easier to just launch purpose built habitation/workshop modules.

>>12200120
Italians are the most genetically diverse people in Europe.
With that being said, they're fucking hairy. But they have a high fashion culture that encourages them all to shave. Italian men care more about fashion and grooming than their women.

>>12200092
Okay well first of all they're korean so idk if that makes me a weeb... also I am from korea lmao. I'm white but i've seen plenty of korean babes

>>12199545
FALCON LONG

>>12199640
>nooooo you can't just stack p 60 satellites and hold them to the rocket using ratchet straps, you need an autistically designed bulky $5 million dispenserinoooo, you're destroying so many potential jobs!!!

>>12200137
That's not what my mother tells me

>>12200146
What does your mother tell you, anon?

>>12200133
>meme
>can't
Not with that attitude!

>>12198507
bruh, I will fuck dat cutie any day, fuck all these haters

>>12200154
>cutie

>>12200148
That I do not have high fashion. I did recently shave my entire body from head to toe last week, so that's correct I guess. Indeed I'm rarely attracted to italian women

>>12199839
>“Viasat steadfastly refuses to allow facts to get in the way of the story it wishes were true,” the company wrote. “SpaceX continues to work to improve the performance and reliability of its vehicles.”
slapped

>>12200133
>that one dude who always shows up to complain about wet workshops
>never makes it specific enough to refute

>>12200168
I have yellow fever and I can never go back

>>12200169
>I did recently shave my entire body from head to toe last week
God, the incessant itching though

>>12200169
Are you from Italy?

>>12200180
the trick is not to shave too close

>>12200150
My attitude is do it right.
Now, if you designed a rocket SPECIFICALLY to be wet workshopped that might be a different matter. Maybe the hull itself isn't the actual fuel tank, but the fuel tank sits snugly INSIDE the hull and can be ejected and then the interior space repressurized.

>>12200181
No, family is fullblood italian. 2nd generation american

Is Starship just a copy of Buran/Energia?

So SN8 has done ambient pressure/cryo pressure. What next? Static fire?

>>12200137
Italian men are hot as fuck. Idk about the women, I prefer Brazilian women.

>>12200201
I'm talking about Italy.
>>12200216
>men
>women
Bi?

>>12200219
Yes

>>12200194
>>12200194
??? You realize that both the fuel tank and the initial habitable space are pressure vessels constructed in the same way, right? Nothing whatsoever prevents you from expanding the life support systems into a flushed fuel tank. Adding more layers doesn't do anything but add a bunch of weight for no reason.

>>12199960
>How would /sfg/ build an O’Neill cylinder using today’s infrastructure?
Simple.
First, build a self-sustaining colony on Mars.
Second, use that colony as a staging area for missions to Phobos (ie most equipment is build and launched from Mars, with the really specific and difficult shit like microchips being sent from Earth).
Third, develop the process machinery necessary to extrude high volumes of very long and high quality basalt fibers by melting Phobos rocks.
Fourth, construct a large steel bottle with a 200 meter diameter and a 1000 meter length by electron-beam welding steel panels together (make the steel from iron ores from Phobos).
Fifth, wrap the steel hull in basalt fibers (for tensile strength) and pressurize it to 1 atmosphere, outfit the interior with carpeting or whatever you put inside an O'Neill cylinder
Done. Recipe produces ~628,000 square meters of internal area. Pro tip, attach copies of the same mining and refining equipment you used to build this thing out of Phobos materials, use some very large low-TWR electric propulsion thrusters to escape Mars orbit and get into the asteroid belt, and park your habitat ship in Ceres orbit to repeat the process.
Fun fact, Phobos alone has enough building material to build enough habitats to house a hundred billion people assuming each square kilometer of internal area is as productive as a typical sub-tropical environment on Earth. Ceres has enough material to create living space for a population a million times bigger.

>>12200224
...m-me too, anon...

>>12200133
It could work if you built Skylab-style mesh floors into the tank. You can bring furniture/equipment on successive flights, but there's no other good way to get floors in there after launch.
And I don't think it would be a great idea if the fuel was RP-1.

>>12200208
Yes.

Ok but if I go to mars, where am I gonna poop?

So this was the final Starlink for the initial public beta for northern states.

>>12200234
We are the masterrace.

>>12200176
Any crew hatches into the workshop would have to be not only functional while in zero gravity but also tough enough to withstand the pressure of a fully fueled tank.
Equipment for this workshop would have to be flown up seperately since there's no space inside during launch, which means you need multiple launches anyway.
All the fixtures required for a livable space, electricity, lighting, heating etc would have to be rigorous enough to withstand the inside of the pressurised fuel tank without becoming damaged.
The contamination of said fixtures with fuel. It would be a huge bitch to clean it out manually in EVA to a standard where it was deemed safe to turn on all the fittings.
And the fact that it's a fuel tank and anythign you want to put in there has to work around the fact that it's fuel tank. If you wanted the module to be a certain shape fior some reason... too bad it needs to be fuel tank shaped because it's a fuel tank first.

None of these issues make a wet workshop impossible, but they make it more of a pain than it's worth, at least when you are looking at existing rocket designs. If you were to create an entirely new rocket that was designed with the wet workshop concept in mind then you could design around these problem from the very begginning. But all you retards keep wanting to turn Starship, a vehicle that is MEANT to be reusable with a high launch rate, into a permanent space station.

>>12200253
You aren't cleaning hypergols. Just vent the thing and the vacuum will clean it. Faster with IR source inside. The other issues remain though.

>>12200176
I'm not that guy, but tanks need wiffle shielding and insulation before they can be converted to long term habitat space, plus most of the mass of any habitat is in the furnishings anyway.
Regardless, the future we're headed towards is one where SpaceX slaps together a $75,000 double-hull 8 meter wide stainless steel man-can module that has spray foam between the inside and the outside barrels and bulkheads, and launches them on Starship to wherever they're being used. Inflatables are a meme, just launch more hard modules. Wet workshops are a meme, just launch more modules. Launching more modules is faster and cheaper. Launch more modules.

deploy blue penis from inside starship fairing. instant lunar lander. thank me later

do you guys think elon stops whatever he's doing to watch these?

>>12200115
pic is great lol, got any more like that?

>>12200290
Not him but I got this and the "Don't Get Attached to the Chimps" cover both posted here recently.

>>12200194
>Now, if you designed a rocket SPECIFICALLY to be wet workshopped that might be a different matter. Maybe the hull itself isn't the actual fuel tank, but the fuel tank sits snugly INSIDE the hull and can be ejected and then the interior space repressurized.
Call it the Sea Cucumber.

>>12200101
Kuiper is plugging along as part of Amazon but BO needs an actual orbital rocket before they can deploy anything.

>>12200283
Deploy electron from inside blue bepis. Instand ascent module. Thank me later.

>>12200203
Now THIS is a take. Based

>>12200302
based based BASED
we are going home boys

>>12200293

>>12200299
New Glenn blows up on it's maiden launch though

>>12200253
>Equipment for this workshop would have to be flown up seperately since there's no space inside during launch
You have the entire starship's standard cargo bay for equipment. It's more than enough to furnish the tank.
>muh contaminants
Noo, not trace methane!
> too bad it needs to be fuel tank shaped
As opposed to the SS itself which is... tank shaped. Because everything in space is either a ball or a fucking cylinder.

>>12200253
> most of the mass of any habitat is in the furnishings anyway.
But not most of the volume. You can get a starship with a load of pre-fab insulation and shielding in the bay into the air at once. Getting the equivalent habitable volume with hard modules means many more missions.

>>12199960
Use heavy lifters to send up large bundles of what are essentially spring loaded steel tent poles, and two hubs for them to plug into to form wagon wheel like spokes. You could snap these poles to one-another at the ends to form even longer spokes. In the end I'd want spokes that could spring out to form a wheel say 100m in diameter. These two spoked wheels will be connected to each-other across a long axis maybe 300m long formed of more telescoping poles and brought to tension with simple kevlar winch straps or steel cable or something else easy to work with. The next step is forming a mostly air-tight membrane, this will be made up of kevlar or some other insulating material woven into large sheets, say about 31.4m wide and 100m long (it would therefor take 30 of these sheets to fully enclose a cylinder, not counting other sheets to form the end caps). These sheets would be held together at their edges by air-tight zippers, once affixed to the ends of the spokes of the wheels they would then be zipped together to form a bag enclosing the volume of a cylinder 100x300m in dimension. A truly air-tight seal can be formed with some vacuum workable cement, thicker layers of insulation will be affixed to the outside, then a thicker protective shell will be constructed out of curved plates of ballistic fiber topped with polished aluminum faces. At this point an "interim" power and life support unit can be attached and the cylinder can be pressurized, normal corrugated vents can be run through it to provide air circulation. Work will then begin on more permanent internal structures while crews live on Starships docked to the growing station. At some point the IPS will be replaced with something more permanent and robust, and the station will be spun up by monoprop rocket motors, ready for habitation.

>>12200299
>Sea Cucumber
Discostan lmao
>>12200115
I love this
>>12200133
Wet workshops and O'neill cylinders are dumb. Possible? Yes. But dumb. I mean maybe in a few years when we have 18m+ ITS shit we can do O'neill experiments. But god damn wet workshops are so fucking DUMB

>>12200315
meant to quote >>12200253 and >>12200273, not the same one twice, oops

>>12200316
for real now, once starship is operational and costing low money the goverment should instantly appoint 500 million dollars (basically nothing to them) to just start putting consumable modules (fuel food and water) in space along with raw material for 3d printing or inflatable modules.

like, youll figure out what to do with it later and ti always yes ore yes or yes or yes will be good for missions, just like, start doing the thing that costs (basically 0 money) and provides a trillion advance3ments.

i dont get why people like spending a trillion moneys for little advancements whent hey could get a trillion advancmements for free moyne

>>12200310
>Space-dabbing while Starships blast off
What madman saw our future and committed it to paper back then?

>>12200328
Is this genuine or a meme shitpost? Kind of sounds like a pasta

>>12200137
Shaving is gross. Hairy is better

>>12200169
>I did recently shave my entire body from head to toe last week

Actual soiboy

>>12200193
The trick is to not shave because it’s retarded

>>12200328
lmao but mom what about space debris MOOOOOM

>>12200341
How else will I swim super fast?

>>12200328
>once starship is operational and costing low money the goverment should instantly
The AMERICAN government should instantly NATIONALIZE the FORGEIN company SpaceX for wrecking the economy by taking away RIGHTFUL AMERICAN JOBS away. It is shameful that this NATIONAL MENACE has been allowed to exist for so long. They even humiliated our beloved and AMERICAN premiere aerospace company BOEING. FORGEINER ELONG MUSK should be tried for his crimes against AMERICAN JOBS provided by the government.

>>12200290

>>12200353
As if that has any significant effect

VITAMIN CEEEEEEEE

>>12200315
Starship could carry small, and fully furnished, manned modules in it's cargo of any shape and with any external parts you need. The crewed part of starship itself is meant to be a vehicle, not a long term habitat/workshop/lab whatever. Starship is a workhorse, not a space station, we shouldn't be trying to make a space station out of it. We should be aiming to launch more starships to BUILD a space station.
>Noo, not trace methane!
I don't like getting explosives in my electronics. It's bad enough those whiny astronaut faggots insist on breathing oxygen, no need to throw other flammables into the mix.

>>12200373
>Starship is a workhorse, not a space station, we shouldn't be trying to make a space station out of it.
Yeah but starship by itself, without even trying is a better space station than the one we already have.

Its like comparing a smartphone with a 1950s calculator. The smartphone is not a calculator, but its so much better that it totally annihilates the ass of the 1950s calculator without even trying

>>12200365
I think you underestimate my extent of my sasquatch heritage

How do we commercialize space?

Orbital habitats?

>>12200382
Hairier the better. I want to be genetically modified to be furred like a gorilla.

>>12200383
https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/28/18642653/nasa-commercial-space-low-earth-orbit-international-space-station-habitats

I have another thought.... what are the launch/success rate on rockets now-a-days? How long till it’s like a commercial airliner?

There, I just saved oldspace.

Introducing Anon's fully reusable STS-derived super heavy lift launch system. Give me your money.

>>12200245
On the potato fields.

>>12200391
Like a bonobo

>>12200383
For a start, just like how to commercialize gold or coal or any other resource you first have to set up some kind of living arrangement near the resource, to utilize the resources of space we need to set up significant living and working space for people near them. The longest, hardest step is ground to orbit, so even a couple dozen large commercial stations will radically alter the way we can utilize space.

>>12200398
i mean. would it work?

>>12200415
STS derivation is a bad idea, but no. It is a fun meme though.

>>12200368

>>12200398
>reusable hypergolic space tug
You do know the AJ10 runs on Aerozine-50/N2O4 right? There's a reason even ULA is pursuing hydrolox for reusable space tugs: lunar ice ISRU.

>>12200414
Is space itself a resource though?

Penrose just won the nobel prize. Have a drink for him tonight in his honor

Who woulda thought empty fucking space would be a resource. Humans are so innovative

>>12200398
>STS/SLS derived
That doesn't make any sense. We all know STS and SLS are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT systems anon. What's next? Are you going to tell me Buran was basically the same as the Shuttle?

>>12200435
Location location location!

>>12200383
"Space tourists" can fill gaps in Starships cargo payload when there isn't enough cargo to pack it full.

>>12200414
I think the only solution with ground to orbit iz da moon

Am I wrong? I’ve posted here before about varying escape velocities.

Yo mama's wet workshop when?

>>12200437

The SLS first stage is just a stretched STS external tank with 4 SSMS's slapped on to it and an extra segment added to the SRB's.

>>12200429
Sure, in the end as long as you can get stuff to it cheaply and get stuff back from it cheaply, it would be better to put dangerous stuff or polluting stuff out there rather than where we live, and at some point when there are simply too many of us for our comfort (I'd argue we're already there with all this geopolitical bullshitting and maneuvering) that it would be better to simply relieve the survival pressures by spreading out, rather than fighting over the same limited spaces here on Earf.

>>12200435
Humans are good at taking empty spaces and putting cool stuff there. We're going to keep doing it until the last one dies, and then our machines will probably keep at it for a lot longer.

>>12200451
Well I’m thinking, a one way trip from space to earth doesn’t require a return trip and those associated costs. So if we based our space operations out of the moon, with lunar materials, (I don’t know if this is possible for fuel). Then we could send anything valuable we find back to earth for free basically. Especially if you had a smart way to send it...

https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/05/19/1001857/how-moon-lunar-mining-water-ice-rocket-fuel/

>>12200398
i wanted to immediately jump in and say it wouldn't get off the ground but it actually would. congrats anon, send it to big jim.

>>12200450
>just a stretched STS external tank
Not anymore. They had to redesign the thing for top loading.

>>12200450
LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!
JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS

>>12200451
>it would be better to put dangerous stuff or polluting stuff out there rather than where we live, and at

>bury things in remote location
>1% chance of failure
>each time containment fails the already remote and unaccesible location just increases a bit. >even if it happened 10 times per year its no big deal

>send nuclear waste to space
>develop a rocket thats 0.00001% chance of failing, basically sci fi but suppose you manage it.
>each time a rocket fails it sprays radioactive waste in an area more or less 50 times bigger than chernobyl.
>if this happens even once in 1000 years it would negate the whole benefit of the system by a lot.
>with current volume of nuclear waste and that sci fi rocket we discussed it will happen 1 time per year aproximately

yeah no objectively bad idea

>>12200398
>just redesign the engine and tank from scratch lmao
Anon SLS is expensive because the tank is basically redesigned from scratch, and it uses the SAME engines. Imagine how much fucking money and time would be dumped into literally, literally, making a brand new rocket.

>>12200485
>Imagine how much fucking money and time would be dumped into literally, literally, making a brand new rocket.
That's when we say "well we've already got this nice tank, so how about using F-1Bs to save money?"

>>12199545
>God
What a faggot

>>12200483
You're a nuclear pussy. We should confront risk with courage and bravado. Instead you are pissing your pants worrying about fallout. Grow a pair

>>12200497
Not accepting a monotheistic creator because
>Muh science is tangible and le carl sagan said god bad
You are the faggot

>>12200499
>We should confront risk with courage and bravado.
It's not risk, its failure.

Imagine your job is fucking girls, but you end up masturbating alone. you didnt face the risk you failed.

The problem is to generate clean energy WITHOUT pollution, wanna win like the alphachads(me) then make it happen, want to lose like the loserbetacucks(you) then just do what youo did your'¿re asholew life

>>12200398

Why methalox?

>>12200513
Imagine you're a retard

>>12200383
Orbital brothels and gambling dens.

When is this fucking test taking place, why are there always Fucking delays with these people?

>>12200516
What the fuck is that thing?

>>12200525
New Shepard is a robust platform, space is hard. We need to be patient anon

>>12200497
Upvoted.
When does the narwhal bacon?

>>12200528
a post Saturn heavy lift vehicle proposal back before Boeing forgot how to git gud

>>12200469

How would you know it would just by looking at a piece of shit mspaint drawing?

>>12200538
I understood that referemce captan america gif

>>12200539
Intuition.

Or by knowing the thrust and mass of SRBs and the volume of the tank and the density of methalox, it's not that hard. shuttle/sls SRBs have a lot of thrust.

>>12200528

Boeing LMLV concept.

2000 tonne payload to LEO capability

>>12200537
I want to see some fucking progress for once, they said the sn8 was gonna bellyflop on 11th, and not one fucking test has been done. They have two test stands for fuck's sake , why are they taking so long?

>>12200516

>>12200558
Hmm? they did a pressure test two days ago and attempted cryo test last night

>>12200398

Reusability won't make your system less expensive bruh.

>>12200555
>shuttle/sls SRBs have a lot of thrust.
With SLS in particular they provide ~75% of the thrust of the entire damn rocket. You could probably add another two SRBs and air-light the RS-25s just before separation.

>>12200522
Sounds sort of dope ngl

kino

The worst part is these sorta studies weren't unusual in the 60s. MLLV is unique only in that it was the last of the bunch.

>>12198555
That's not Boca Chica

>>12200593
"once and future" implies it was in the past, so it'd have to be KSC.

>>12200398

Why add a 5th RS-25?

im concerned about virgin guys

>>12200520
>imagine
im still right and you know it.

If you propose an objective youre the master win master of the universe that deserves sex with any girl he likes ONLY if you accomplish it

youre the masterlosermaster of the whole universe that should help others taunt him if you dont succeed

its as easy as that, once you say what hte goal is you cant goal post move

>>12200606
then have sex with us pls

How would one harvest H2 directly from Jupiter or Saturn for use as fuel in refineries in the inner solar system?

In our current technological state, anything that enters their atmosphere never comes back out.

>>12200007
Viasat is mad that they can't keep on using their old as shit junkers due to actually getting competition.

>>12200637

forgot pic

>>12200528
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgtmR9IRalQ

>>12200637
You start at Neptune and work your way back in, since it has the lowest gravity of the four. That allows incremental development of more powerful thrusters.

Can the thrust from electric propulsion always be scaled up with more electrical energy?

>>12200675
Unless you get featherweight sub-ton fusion reactors it's always going to run into the limit of what your power supply can provide before you hit the physical limits of the drive. Jeff Greason has a good article on this.

https://tauzero.aero/its-the-power-supply-that-matters/

>>12200373
>Starship could carry small, and fully furnished, manned modules in it's cargo of any shape and with any external parts you need
This obsession with shape makes no sense. A big tube does what you need and is the most efficient pressurized space. Pretty much every ISS module is a tube with connectors, and less efficiently utilized at that given the size constraints.

>Starship is a workhorse, not a space station
So what? No one's going to be cranking out space stations cheaply and quickly for decades at this rate. SS will be pumped out on the regular. Putting them to whatever use you could ask of them until you have better off-earth infrastructure only makes sense.

>muh explosions
Because it's impossible to flush out the tank to the point that the methane left over is at a sub-flammable level on re-mix. Come on.

>>12200675
It starts at 0 and if you add more energy it scales linearly to 0.

Get to know her bros. This is your new appointment to the National Aeronautics and Earth Science Administration

>>12200689
>This obsession with shape makes no sense
What if I want solar panels? Docking ports? Built in airlocks? Radiators? Windows? Robot arm?
You tell me nobody's going to be making space stations, well I say they should be. The fact that nobody wants to is exactly the problem. We could have colonized mars decades ago if people really wanted to.

>>12200686
Before I even clicked the link I had a feeling he would mention VASIMR lol

>>12200725
>We could have colonized mars decades ago if people really wanted to.
Part of the problem is most of those early plans anticipated more atmosphere than Mars actually has. Mariner was a huge success, but the data it brought back permanently trashed most existing colonization plans. Zubrin's Mars Direct plan was the only one that had a prayer of working before Starship, and that was sort of a pipe dream in its own right since it assumed the equivalent of basically SLS Block 2 for a pair of 120 ton launches a year.

>>12200734
Greason took the beamed power pill and founded a company called Electric Sky to make it work for Earth lift.

>>12200740
Greason is a smart guy, his plasma sail work is impressive.

>>12200716
The what?

>>12200398
>orange tank bad
It's still made out of effectively tissue paper, it's not designed to be structural. That's why the Shelby Launch System is having so much trouble.
>>12200368
>>12200425
TANG btfo

>>12200430
Yes, I heard this morning, for something to do with black holes? How about a quasi-crystal tiled pizza in his honor?

>>12200674

*Uranus

It has the weakest gravity of all 4 of the giants, and in fact has weaker surface gravity than Earth, (about 90%, similar to Venus), despite being 14x more massive than Earth.

>>12200747
John Slough was the guy who came up with the plasma sail idea. Greason basically just figured out how to stop with particle beams on moons or asteroids.

>>12200762
>>12200430
whoa, i saw the thread on /sci/ earlier and assumed it was a troll. this is awesome.

Before I put any more effort into this, would it be a dumb idea to combine the first and second stage to make a TSTO saturn upgrade as a fuck you to SLS (assuming we used those Modern F-1's) or do you NEED that second stage to be seperate? Reusability is in mind

>>12200483
>"waste" still contains 98% fuel
>throw it away
breeder reactor plz

>>12200777
3STO is necessary for the moon or high orbit, which is why I think New Armstrong will be that for New Glenn. TSTO Saturn is basically Skylab to LEO every flight.

>>12200365
I've met Italian men
yes, it absolutely makes a difference

>>12200777
Checked, but the second stage needs to be a separate thing or at least on top of your extended first stage. Not sure how well the F-1B throttles however.

>>12200790
F-1B is less than a hundred parts so there's clearly some room for complexity if you need to add throttling.

If Starship makes space access as cheap as SpaceX aims for, then what kind of sports would be popular in space?

>>12200777
It would depend on how deep a modernized F1 could throttle, and whether or not it could actually be refired the three times necessary for a return to Earth. (First firing to takeoff, second firing to perform a boostback burn, third firing for propulsive landing). Unfortunately for the F1, I think it's lineage will stop with the one engine, by the time an F1-C could be developed or the F1-B could be manufactured, I think other practical modern heavy lift engines will have surpassed it. I mean the F1-B is already so radically changed compared to it's predecessor that I'd hesitate to even really call it the same engine anymore.

>>12200790
>>12200800
Just make a really big Merlin.

>>12200822
That's pretty much what the F-1B was

The future we could've had.

>>12200330
>when chimp parts rained from the skies
That’s pretty metal dude

>>12200821
Kerolox is dead end.

>>12200831
G O D
D A M M I T

>>12200829
Did they go with a pintle injector? Because that's the spicy meatball that gives Merlin the reliability and throttling.

>>12200864
imagine

>>12200831
Imagine if they never stoped making the saturn rockets,but instead just kept improving the process and lowering the price.
The US would ahve been on the moon and freedom station would dwarf whatever the russians have.

>>12200831
>>12200864
ngl I'm not super mad because SpaceX has shown clusters of small engines are viable and reliable

it would be pretty cool to have a 9 F-1B super lifter meme

>>12200876
>Ares 1, but instead of being a death stick it's a single F1
That's way more sensible than the actual design

>>12200876
Jesus christ i wouldn’t even make fun of this thing for partially running on hydrogen (hydrolox boosters i assume?). Fuck

>>12200888
The F-1B is a kerolox engine.

>>12200900
the core sustainer would always be hydrolox on SLS / Ares 5, but the Pyrios boosters made that a lot less stupid.

>>12200881
>it would be pretty cool to have a 9 F-1B super lifter meme
Why not go for 37?

>>12200804
>In the 60s and70s they thought the 2020 olympics might be held on the moon
>In reality the 2020 olympics were postponed because we refused to acknowledge a virus because it would be racist towards a bunch of commies and now millions of people are dead.

>>12200804
all kinds of shit, you could have all kinds of gravitys from 0 to 2-3gs in a rotating space station.

Imagine 3g wrestling, ultra extreme, the people who did that would make current bodybuilders look wimpy in comparison

Once costs are low enough i could envision a space station dedicated exclusively to sport.

Some weird 3d football surely could exist too

On the moon you could swim fast enough to jump out of the water like a dolphin.

Sports would be rad but i think what really would explode would be artistic dance, the kind of shit you could pull in reduced gravity would look absolutely breathtaking

>>12200909
>those fucking fins
lmao

>>12200888
Boosters would be F1-B driven LOX/Kerosene, the core is pretty much the same thing SLS is proposing. The difference is that F1-Bs still put out monstrous amounts of thrust necessary to hoist the rocket but have significantly better ISP than shitty thermite candy Suicide Rocket Boosters, 20-30s more. They were also intended for easy refurbishment after recovery, they might not have yielded reflight value like Merlins or Raptor will, but they still would have represented a significant improvement to NASA's economic efficiency.

>>12200876
Don't let the saturn-style paint scheme fool you. It's just taking SLS and giving rocketdyne yet another engine development to go years over schedule with.

XLR-11 or BEEEES for the second stage of a caveman launch vehicle? Third stage is an aerobee either way.

>>12200912
imagine this, a complex interpretative dance in which small propulsive packages are hurled into the air, the dancers jump to a height that looks counterintuitively high, grab the propulsive pack and propels themselves back up to grab the next one, and just keep on climbing to silly heights, many of them at the same time, they bump into each other and perform different acrobatics all the while grabbing the propulsive packs from time to time to boost themselves back up, all inside a huge pressurized dome, when they are done they all deploy gigantic wings and gracefully glide to the ground.

also, literal flying will be possible in low g just like flapping cloth wings, in low enough g you could pull it off with just your arms. this would be in pressurized domes. but in titan you could really pull it off with a jacket and a mask, dont even need full spacesuit

also crazy structures, like, crazy totally counterintuitive.

arches big enough to fit manhattan under them.

the main issue with towers is wind, which doesnt exist on the moon , combine that with reduced gravity and you could easily have a building thats 1/2 as wide as the empire state but 10 times taller, without even using exotic materials, just the same ones from earth

>>12200928
at this point they should put chromed paint on it to make it shiny in thehopes people associate it with the starship

>>12200938
if you have the aj10-27 bee config then having that as the third stage and a xasr second stage can work. otherwise xlr-11 does better.

>>12200910
>Olympcis postponed because right wings think vaccines are evil and are against science, when we could have left wing communist paradise sharing technology for all, but right wing poor people prefer to defend corporations even tough they dont profit from them.

FTFY

>>12200877
>mars direct launched on saturn v
>not this timeline

>>12200950
Jesus, I'm glad I grew out of my libtard phase

>>12200947
Why would I use XASR if I have AJ10-27? Am I a brainlet?

This madlad I'm watching on YouTube is using Vanguard's first stage as a second stage, holy shit.

>>12200881
>ngl I'm not super mad because SpaceX has shown clusters of small engines are viable and reliable
I'm still pissed we don't have at least ONE operational rocket running on the F-1 family. It's still the THROOSTiest liquid rocket engine we ever made as a nation.

>>12200953
>a-anon, don't you love me anymore?

>>12200958
Post the nudies, u wont

>>12200857
Fuckin aye

>>12200950
We told you it was an issue and you called us racist conspiritards.
We bought masks and you told us that masks only worked for doctors for some reason.
Then when things reached their peak you put on a mask and started blaming the only people who were trying to prevent it while you were off going "just a flu lmao!"

>>12200962

>>12200950
>>12200954
whether top left is retarded or not, can we all agree bottom left is extra retarded

>>12200909
We choose... we choose, to go to the moon, in this decade, not because it is easy, but because ouah' rockets ah' based

>>12200958
>Tfwn huge tiddy Nova Onee-San
JUST scrub my life.

>>12200955
XASR has more thrust and a longer burn time so it gives you more total impulse. Having a XASR stage boosting a smaller AJ10-27 stage gets you the most delta V.

Also the vacuum-optimized Vanguard engine makes for an awesome upper stage as the Vega down the line. Better than Agena imo.

>>12200965
>We told you it was an issue and you called us racist conspiritards.
you probably have me confused with someone else

CHOO CHOO HERE COMES THE SRB TRAIN
NEXT STOP ORBIT

>>12200963
>Milton Lesser
I read that as MILLION LASER for a second.

>>12200970
bottom left are useful idiots deployed into top right by top left to destroy social cohesion and technical progress
>yuribezmenov.webm

>>12200973
Someone with KSP RSS/RP-1 should try to make this.

>>12200984
You probably have ME confused with someone else too because I never denied the virus or said not to wear a mask. in fact I wore a mask even when people were getting bashed on the streets for wearing them.

>>12200831
imagine if instead of shit launch cistern they went ahead and used these to fly
a 'saturn v mark ii', made far cheaper and capable of carrying much more to orbit by way of
modern production capabilities and the aid of CAD
would be so fucking kino

>>12200996
You'd need to stretch it to compensate for the realities of tank domes.

>>12200996
>NOVA ULTIMA
lel all it's missing is the Imperial aquila and some Gothic architecture embellishments.

>>12201003
>260 inch SRBs and nuclear upper stage
MY FUCKING DICK

>>12201005
The tanks should be properly scaled. I did the volume math myself.

>>12200996
By the fact that the NUB has stock KSP fins I suspect that's already been done

>>12200990
And for a second I thought you typed "Milton Laser" which is a cool name.

>>12200990
>bottom left are useful idiots deployed into top right by top left to destroy social cohesion and technical progress
im curious to see what you think about bottom right

>>12200996
Where are you getting 154 tons to LEO for the Saturn V? The most I've ever seen from NTRS stuff is ~280,000 pounds even if the s-ivb was expended for orbital insertion.

>>12200996
I did something similar in KSP once, although it ended up looking more like a giant 9mm bullet. 200+ ton payload capacity and since everything in KSP is scaled down to about 30% you could ballpark it's payload at 600+ tons if it were real.

>>12201023
based but naive madlads who love freedom and hate the government

>>12201026
I pulled it from Wikipedia.

>>12201028
Why ballpark it when you could install RSS/RO and do it at full scale with real engines, fuels and tankage weight?

>>12201023
>>12201031

There are a few obvious false flaggers (see this year's Libertarian Party ticket) but mostly they're people who just want to be left alone and haven't realized the left won't do that without physical force.

>>12201008
>lel all it's missing is the Imperial aquila and some Gothic architecture embellishments.
You're giving me ideas.

>>12201040
Too much trouble, RSS only works sporadically on my save and RO/RP1 fucks up my SSTU mod, eliminating or overwriting a vital resource needed to construct inflatable habs and rotohabs.

>>12201033
Interesting, the reports it cites aren't technical ones and I wonder if somebody accidentally confused a lifting power of 140 short tons with 140 metric tons at some point.

>>12201050
kek the Shuttle tailfin poking out of the side makes it funnier

>>12201053
I'll mock it up at full scale in RO, but I don't want to spend the time futzing with RCS, making it look nice, etc. What's the upper stages?

>>12201063
No clue, it isn't my design, I'd imagine though that the upper would either be more F1s or nuclear.

>>12201063
Here is the upper stage.

>>12201063
>>12201070
If it's in keeping with NASA designs of the era it would probably be M-1s.

>>12200578
>You could probably add another two SRBs and air-light the RS-25s just before separation
Sounds like a super heavy Titan IV. Not the worst idea ever. I'd be skeptical about the air ignition reliability of the RS-25s, but I'm sure the problem could be mitigated with enough money.

>>12201077
Also, the booster stage in case you need it.

I'm gonna back up my RO folder before trying this silliness.

What if I want realistic KSP gameplay without RSS/RO? I’m thinking of JNSQ + BDB + Tantares. I love RSS just my computer takes half an hour to load the damn thing and it crashes while playing.

I played JNSQ + BDB a while back and I simulated an All-Kerolox Saturn V with a Gemini lander on the moon instead of Apollo. It was cool.

>>12201083
>Sounds like a super heavy Titan IV.
Revenge for DoD picking Titan IV over the Shuttle.

>>12201087
I can't get into KSP without Real Fuels desu. "Liquid fuel" is too vague to be fun.

>>12201083
>>12201090
>Parachute recovered SRBs
>RS-25 sustainer core, flyback to runway
>Dream Chaser on top
I M A G I N E

>>12200725
>Docking ports? Built in airlocks? Radiators? Windows? Robot arm?
Nothing about the shape of the main vessel stops you from putting all of that shit on it. The SS itself is a tube with radiators, windows, airlocks, and docking ports. I don't see why you think this suddenly changes beyond being intentionally disingenuous.
>You tell me nobody's going to be making space stations, well I say they should be.
Any idyllic sentiment could justified with 'this is what should happen'. I'm not interested in that. Competency in the space industry is thin on the ground.

>>12201101
>>Dream Chaser on top
Dream Chaser 2.0 with integral service module and an AJ10-137 (Apollo CSM engine) or modernized equivalent.

MOON CHASER

>>12200716
Heh, she looks like a 60 year old version of my ex.

>>12201110
As long as the integral service module is recovered so we can maintain 100% recovery rate

>>12201115
Integral meaning integrated into the spacecraft all the way through runway landing. None of this detach in orbit shit.

>>12201087
Kerbalism + RealAntennas too