/sci/ - Science & Math

Here's your space shipping container, bro.

>>12214042
I actually really like the aesthetics of cygnus, it's like the most utility over anything else. Can't wait for Dragon XL, then we'll have two shipping containers in space

Why do companies even bother with hypersonic jets that will apparently be ready in like 40 years when Starship will be delivering cargo and passengers in less than 5?

*ahem*
Testing, testing one two three
*feedback*

Attention everyone
Attention please, I have an announcement to make


FUCK BOEING AND FUCK THE SLS


Thank you.

>>12214037
Best NASA admin since Thomas Paine. I hope SpaceX offers him a kickass lobbyist job when he gets replaced.

So like why the fuck don't we do something like breakthrough starshot? We have the technology to send probes out of the oort cloud in our lifetime. Would be fucking awesome

>>12214065
space is hard
and expensive

>>12214077
#OkULA

Pretty fucking crazy to think that in probably less than a year from now, we’ll have the technology to put a fully laden Abrams tank into a rocket, go to orbit and bring it back to Earth

>>12214054
Elon can't (yet) produce enough rockets to replace an airline's fleet of trans oceanic airliners.

If Venus had Earth's atmosphere, how much easier would it be to get to LVO than LEO?

>>12214091
Not much easier lmao. Both planets have an immense gravity well, compared to something like Mars

So what's China and Russia response to this?

>>12214128
>as early as next year
So, is SpaceX getting a DOD funding injection for Earth to Earth? Would that appreciably accelerate the development timeline?

>>12214128
Sobbing quietly into their baiju/vodka?

Scientifically speaking, how hard is the DoD's boner right now?

>>12214128
>TRANSCOM

>>12214139
Transportation, not the other thing.

>>12214130
This fucking timeline

I was initially excited about the DOD news but the more I think about it the more questions it raises. What military cargo is so urgently needed that it has to be delivered in under an hour? Wars and insurgencies aren’t exactly minute by minute events. Tanks, helicopters, trucks and ammo are usually delivered by ship because it’s unlikely they’ll be needed instantly.

The only thing I can think of is vehicles and equipment for some special operations raid that needs to happen NOW and there’s no time to lose.

>>12214156
Rapid fortification of islands in the Pacific is a possibility. Marines land, kill all the Chinese, and blow up their shit, then a starship drops in with SAMs, radars, and anti-ship missiles to lock it down before the PLA can respond.

Superdraco is my wife!

>>12214156
Imagine there is a conflict between US and China in South China Sea, and US forces take control a remote island but lack of supply, Starship could delivery hundreds of tons supply in just one day and it doesn't any runway or seaport, which is impossible for any traditional vehicle.

>>12214165
Not just missiles, also Mk110 naval guns and guided shells. They're the cool new counter to chink boat swarms. Assuming air supremacy is in place then those Marines could hold out against anything without land attack missiles of their own, and those are typically much bigger targets for the Navy to swat down.

>>12214178
>it doesn't any runway or seaport
This is a good point. It requires less footprint than an airfield would. On top of that, while there’s zero chance they’d land a Starship in a combat zone, it’s a hell of a lot more survivable than a slow-flying cargo aircraft.

>>12214178
>>12214165
Wouldn’t something like this require a mechanism for unloading the starship, like a big ass crane? It’d be pretty unfeasible for starship to to carry a massive internal crane

>>12214192
>It’d be pretty unfeasible for starship to to carry a massive internal crane
Would it?

>>12214192
>It’d be pretty unfeasible for starship to to carry a massive internal crane
That's being worked on for Moonship.

>>12214192
huh i was imagining more an orbital supply drop
so just expendable reentry container or something
those cargo starships are going on a one way trip
a military base that can relaunch a cargoship back can afford a crane

>>12214156
sub-1 hour trip
9 hour loading and unloading

>>12214198
I’d wager that crane would be rated for 2 ton pallets for moon base building, not something rated to lift and lower a 50 ton plus armoured vehicle to the ground

>>12214209
I can already see grunts painting FRONT TOWARDS ENEMY on the engine skirt of a SuperHeavy.

>>12214156
I mean I don't know how the cargo bay volumes compare, but Starship is cheaper than a C17. And gets shit there faster. Cargo military planes typically don't fly shit in directly to the warzone. Most of the time they are flying supplies into a safe runway and delivering stuff to bases on a routine schedule. Think of MRE's and sandbags and tents and metal and such. This is where starship could replace cargo planes, logistically. They aren't dropping ODST's and weapons into battles. And I think the DoD is getting smart and watching the progress of Elon and is considering cashing in when it is young so they can help development and get better discounts because they've been there since the beginning before everyone else.

>>12214165
>>12214178
>>12214179
Oh my lord this is literally like an autistic military man's dream. I remember being fascinated in high school history class learning about the vietnam war and helicopters (in terms of logistics). Sub-1 hour fortifications would be fucking INSANE. The power of capitalism is more than just a meme lmao

What are they building now?
https://twitter.com/RGVaerialphotos/status/1314775965063680000

>>12214240
>Sub-1 hour fortifications would be fucking INSANE
I’m thinking they could fit a full ballistic missile defense radar in the fairing. Instead of bothering unloading the ship after landing, they can just deploy the radar and use it to pass targeting data to a Starship-carried THAAD or more mobile assets in the region (like planes and Aegis destroyers). It’d go a long way towards negating the Chinese A2AD bubble on Pacific islands, while freeing up naval assets to continue defending the fleets.

>>12214139
Lol I worked for transcom doing apple tech support, it sucked complete ass. Only lasted a month.

>>12214130
>So, is SpaceX getting a DOD funding injection for Earth to Earth?
No it's a CRADA agreement, which doesn't give funding. The military is looking for ideas and SpaceX is being asked to come up with sales pitch.

>>12214272
>Diabetic woman lusting after Jim’s Mountain Dew
Good thing they have security in the room.

>>12214140
they are the same thing

>>12214247
Wind turbines.

>>12214301
That one guy on the NSF stream the other night seemed pretty convinced that they weren’t going to be building a wind farm.

>>12214306
>>12214247
starship is going to be a rotary rocket actually, elon is posting about it on twitter tomorrow

>>12214178
if starship has 100 ton payload capacity you could allocate 500 kg per grunt of life support, basic equipment and grunt so you could have starships delivering 200 grunts anywhere in the world within an hour. Send another one with sabatier and water sucking equipment so you can get the grunts home and you just fucking revolutionized conventional warfare

>>12214301
>>12214306
Why not solar? Are they going to do wind farms on Mars?

>>12214178
>sets up space based anti ICBM and hypersonic missile laser network using starship
>blow china and russia off the map with multi megaton democracy dispersal units
>they cant do shit because you just fucking shot down their retaliatory nukes with your space death-lasers
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1mlCPMYtPk

>>12214330
How are you going to prevent it from getting shot down?

>>12214339
Lasers are a total meme for BMD, Literally never had a successful shootdown

>>12214340
you could use another starship to tungsten rods of death from space to take out anti aircraft installations and kill everything in a large enough area for the craft to land

>>12214347
a shit ton of suicide interceptor mini satellites should do the trick if the military is retarded and cant laser

>>12214347
>In January 2010, the high-energy laser was used in-flight to intercept, although not destroy, a test Missile Alternative Range Target Instrument (MARTI) in the boost phase of flight.[3] On February 11, 2010 in a test at Point Mugu Naval Air Warfare Center-Weapons Division Sea Range off the central California coast, the system successfully destroyed a liquid-fuel boosting ballistic missile. Less than an hour after that first missile had been destroyed, a second missile—a solid-fuel design—had, as announced by the MDA, been "successfully engaged", but not destroyed, and that all test criteria had been met. The MDA announcement also noted that ABL had destroyed an identical solid-fuel missile in flight eight days earlier.[17]
>This test was the first time that a directed-energy system destroyed a ballistic missile in any phase of flight.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_YAL-1

>>12214179
We ride at dawn bitches

how are you lads coping with the fact that when biden gets elected we're done for?

>>12214370
Gateway and SLS are almost unkillable. Even if NASA gets redirected from human spaceflight to climate science, I think that Artemis will continue along even if it's at a slower pace. SpaceX has even less to worry about.

>>12214357
YAL-1 was canceled and never killed an ICBM in a realistic setting

>>12214376

>>12214370

>>12214370
I hope so, honestly the only reason to even go to space is for earth science and climate monitoring satellites.

>>12214339
Russia is already working on a(n atomic?) cruise torpedo and atomic cruise missile to deliver nuclear weapons from any angle without leaving earth atmosphere anyway.

>>12214357
I cant believe they actually built this shit. Was the only reason to just suck taxpayer money on these insane projects that they knew would not work?

>>12214398
ok we only nuke china, they are the ones who deserve it anyways

>>12214370
Lori garver is a saintess, she will deliver us from climate change as leader of the national earth science admin

We simply can't go to mars.

>>12214428
Physically cannot, or shouldn't?

Gas giant atmospheric colonies when bros?

>>12214367
I like how the B-52 Stratofortress is a direct descendant of the B-17, from the name to the early models having a 20mm Vulcan tailgun, made less than ten years after the B-17 left service, and it's been used as an orbital launch platform.

scientifically speaking, what's gonna be the B-52 of space

“People are annoyed by Elon — how does this guy who smokes pot beat us?” the official reportedly said.

>>12214439
Probably Starship. You're not gonna get much better for heavy lift from Earth or bulk transport to Mars without serious advances in propulsion and power supply technology.

>>12214429
I didn't think that far ahead.

Why is PBS spacetime the only content made by that group that isn't a shitload of cringe? Am I the only one that thinks this... I feel like it's because Hank Green has kept his smudgy fingerprints as far away from it as possible

>>12214470
As far as I can tell matt odowd is pretty based

>>12214470
youtubing is mostly cringe

>>12214470
hobbit is pretty based
some of their other series are okay when it's a male presenter, but all of the female ones are fucking awful

>>12214340
Stealth Starship plus trajectory changes plus decoys

If you are sending a starship full of cargo to another spot on the earth, for the military. Then it is a one way trip.

So you build an airbag system to tip the starship onto its side at the landing zone. Then you cover it in dirt and camo netting. Making it into a living space, or fuel or ammo dump.

>>12214340
Lots of chaff and flares, plus speed.

>>12214240
I can't remember the name of the programme now but I'm sure there was a concept similar to Prompt Global Strike but to land a small group of special forces anywhere on earth within a couple of hours. Starship basically realises that but with 10x the payload or whatever and a fraction of the cost

>>12214156
Just the existence of the capability will cause headaches for opponents and necessitate expenditure to mitigate the effect

>>12214516
I like the idea of a surprise strike with one-way starships but having given it some thought it feels too janky. The practical use would be to have landing barges in uncontested water or with a carrier group and offload from those, then you can do business as usual pretty much.

>>12214091
Surface gravity
8.87 m/s2
0.904 g

>>12214248
>I’m thinking they could fit a full ballistic missile defense radar in the fairing.
>>12214339
> space based anti ICBM and hypersonic missile laser network using starship

>all of a sudden a dozen lazer Starships drop out of orbit onto an island and encircle it with point defence

>tfw the mission doesn't go quite to plan

>>12214596
>Kessler Space Program

>>12214596
Hey it’s technically still a rendezvous
>>12214611
Hahah

>>12214240
>The power of capitalism
SpaceX is the worst example of capitalism. They explicitly exist to realise a hefty money loser (Mars), and are deliberately not publicly traded.

>>12214229
I've never really understood that research model. Pay for research then pay again as a customer, how does it work, does spacex return the research money as a loan, is it just a grant, it has to be repaid somehow?

Soundtrack of this mission: https://youtu.be/c5YMuZtouUA

>>12214618
The real mark against SpaceX in terms of calling it a purely capitalist institution is that it required state cooperation to survive early on. There's nothing anticapitalist about saying fuck you to shareholder meddling and the arbitrary restrictions that come with it.

>>12214617
>>12214611
It was supposed to be rendezvous and docking followed by a two week stay testing everything out before lunar flyby mission, but after undocking to rotate the capsules for better solar panel coverage but there was a slight problem during the redocking sequence and the stay in orbit had to be cut short
probably someone should have thought to put some RCS on the service module in addition to the capsule

>>12214056
based

>>12214340
saturation

Daily remember that it's 2020 and there is still no human on the Moon and on Mars.

>>12214628
If you don't pay for the research you run the risk of not being able to buy it later.

I dreamed I saw the silver spaceships flying in the yellow haze of the sun

>>12214441
Nobody actually said that. God this thread is summer sometimes

>>12214816
>My man I have seen ships

>>12214880
ogey
>One industry official said executives inside Boeing “can’t accept” SpaceX is flying people first. “People are annoyed by Elon — how does this guy who smokes pot beat us?” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because that person was not authorized to speak publicly. “We have a lot of humble pie to eat here.”

>>12214880
it's autumn retardando

>>12214816
based
https://youtu.be/gGEhbRvfNS4

As I understand it the astronauts on crew dragon don’t actually do anything to control the ship on ascent or docking with the ISS. It’s completely autonomous. How does that compare with the Space Shittle and older vehicles? We’re they ‘manually controlled’ or autonomous too?

>>12214880
Oh yes someone definitely said that

>>12214914
You mean, like, steer the ship? It's not that easy in rocketry.

I wouldn't normally post a link f4pn the fucking Grauniad but: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/oct/10/european-space-agency-finalises-plans-to-explore-the-moon-properly

> The hope is that exploration will be fully under way by the end of the decade, said Parker. “By then, we will have had 30 years working on the International Space Station. We’ll get back to the moon during this decade and spend 15 to 20 years doing everything that needs to be done to explore the moon. Then we can think about the next step: going to Mars.”

I look forward to the day several decades hence that oldspace finally manage to land a pathetic tin can on Mars, only to be greeted with the sight of a thriving proto-civilisation of thousands of colonists, courtesy of SpaceX.

>>12214928
Yeah eurofags can fart around on the moon for 20 years on the moon while I, amerilard, am getting rimmed and sucked off at the same time, eating a big mac, breastfeeding on mars

>>12214928
Oldspace visions of the future are fucking hilarious. It's like watching someone plan interior decorations while bombs are falling on their neighborhood.

>>12214941
Can you explain, I pulled an all nighter and don't get the joke

>>12214944
Sorry if it was poorly constructed, but basically they're treating it as business as usual and not making any adjustments for the reality at hand. It's a joke to think this kind of slow progress will remain relevant in the face of disruption.

>>12214928
Is ESA blind? 20 fucking years till we can think about Mars?? Bruh we're sending cargo in 2022, get with the program

The absolute fucking state of the shutlel

>>12214953
https://youtu.be/_pq3PLA57m4

>>12214968
Buran wins again!

Bros, on a scale from 1 to 10, how much do you actually believe in Starship? Do you believe it will be cheaper to launch than F9? Do you believe it will launch several times in a day? All that before 2024?

>>12214791
So it's not a loan? >>12214880

>>12214989
Spacex has been pretty good on their cost and timeline predictions but one thing they have yet to get right is how many launches they'll get. Probably a deliberate exaggeration to get venture capital funds. So thats really the only part I doubt.

>>12214791
So it's not a loan?

>>12214989
8/10, several times a day launch i am skeptical of

>>12215006
no

>>12214979
Cute Buran!

>>12214989
If you can get full reuse then it'll be cheaper than an F9 after ~5 flights or so. I think getting that to happen by 2024 is possible. Same-day reflight before the 2030s is not something I'd expect.

I think I'm a believer with well-tempered expectations but sometimes /sfg/ thinks I'm a Musk hater who wants it to fail, so I guess I have to go 4/10 or so.

>>12215007
But can you imagine if it hits both those milestones? Fully reusable and several launches per day.

>>12214989
7/10
it will be a fine rocket, but it will never be as good as promised.

>>12214989
If one is never happening and ten is it goes almost exactly as Elon believes it will (without even adjusting for Elon time) then probably a seven or eight. I think it'll be a few times the launch price and certainly won't meet the milestones of production and advancement that Elon has set, bit it will definitely get cargo to Mars this half of the decade and men on Mars during the second half. Don't know why exactly the military wants a E2E transport Starship that bad but it seems like that's practically a guarantee to work out for Elon to some notable capacity. Multiple launches per day could definitely happen if they get the sea-based launch pads working and producing.

>>12214989
7, I think SpaceX can eventually get Starship to be mostly what they promised, but I suspect that they wont meet all promises like with Falcon 9. However, the Falcon 9 dominates the market right now despite this so I still have high hopes for Starship.

>>12215055
what did they fail to deliver on F9? second stage reuse? raptor upper stage?

>>12215067
F9 never has and never will have the turnaround rate they wanted for it.
However, the biggest reason for that is that almost everyone was put to work on crew dragon or starship instead of continuing F9 development, so I don't agree with the assessment.

>>12214470
To me PBS spacetime is fucking cringe. Can't remember the name of the guy, but his voice just makes me cringe. It sounds like such a forced "I'm sophisticated and educated" posh type of voice that it just makes me irk.

>>12215067
Number of booster flights, SpaceX was aiming for ten but is struggling to do five. Second stage reuse. I also vaguely remember that SpaceX wanted to do a week refurbishment for a booster and refly it, and they haven't done that yet.

>>12215042
Oh I have no doubt they'll be capable of multiple launches a day, the question is will there be any reason to do it?

>>12215073
>>12215082
Here's to hoping they take lessons learned and apply to starship, especially on turnaround and cadence

>>12215082
>Number of booster flights, SpaceX was aiming for ten but is struggling to do five.
Old news, they've done six and are the current crop are holding up fine, should be on track for double digits.
Second stage reuse was never something they committed to, it was only a suggestion. Far from a promise.

>>12215100
Turnaround and cadence are the biggest issues facing Starship in my opinion, I'm really interested to see what their solutions are.

Is anyone here actually going to school for aerospace engineering? If so how difficult is it in reality?

>>12215124
Personally I found cutting off my nuts and eating them to be easier than rocket science. Don't even bother if you aren't the top of the class.

>>12215124
Probably not much harder than mechanical engineering. AFAIK, SpaceX's workforce is mainly mechanical/structural engineering

>>12214914
Shuttle was intentionally not controllable from ground because of a history of astronauts disliking the idea of being "spam in a can".

>>12215177
I didn't do particularly well in highschool, but also was depressed and didn't ever pay attention in any of my classes, but I still managed to pass. Got straight As in (community) college while still not paying attention. The only other thing I would consider doing with my life at this point would be flying planes.
Also
>Personally I found cutting off my nuts and eating them to be easier than rocket science.
I'm already volcel anyway so i'm used to it.

>>12215195
>community college
Stick to planes

Will SpaceX ever arrive to build a starship model without the rings but by fusing or pressing one single block of metal as shown in this rendering?
It could possibly be not only more aesthetic but also more resistant with less weak soldering spots.

>>12215200
I dropped out of community college cuz I had no major. Just been working for the past few years. I'm pretty positive I'd do fine if I went back to school, I just didn't have a reason to for the past few years.

>>12215202
Maybe with a mature factory. Right now its all prototypes. Even then its not guaranteed unless more smoother single trim steel is cheaper/faster.

>>12214989
What I don't understand is that it seems like no one else can see a world where they get starship superheavy flying, but it actually ends up taking them 2-3 years until they land reliably, just like the F9.

>>12215202
Well they still have their mystery in-house alloy yet to be unveiled unless they've decided to stick with 304L (which seems comfortably capable of doing the job), I certainly see them bringing production in house to some extent and making bigger rolls to reduce welds. But one single piece? I don't know anything about steel production but I doubt anyone is doing single piece steel that massive. They'd also need to shape it manually which is probably more expensive than just using different roll thicknesses.

>>12214989
8

Things it will do
>Be cheaper than a Falcon 9
>Send humans to Mars (though maybe a later iteration)
>Replace the Falcons
>Beat SLS and New Glenn to orbit
>Make the rest of the industry look like clowns

Things it won't do
>Be anywhere near as cheap as a Falcon 1
>Deliver humans to the moon under Artemis
>Send cargo to Mars before 2029
>Send humans to Mars this decade
>Fly people in the first half of this decade
>E2E (especially not with passengers)
>Be Soyuz-tier weather-resistant
>Launch multiple times daily

>>12215314
>Make the rest of the industry look like clowns
This for sure

>>12215277
>What I don't understand is that it seems like no one else can see a world where they get starship superheavy flying, but it actually ends up taking them 2-3 years until they land reliably, just like the F9.
But the context has changed significantly. Reusability has been proven with much transferable knowledge gained from F9, Elon's wealth has ballooned and that's even without considering Starlink's potential to add tens of billions extra to his net worth, SpaceX's engineering approach has been vindicated by Bobndoug's successful trip to the ISS with Boeing humiliated for good measure, and I'd suggest major players including wealthy investors and the US military are starting to realise SpaceX is not flash in the pan but in fact by far the most serious and successful player in space launch on earth, and potentially on the brink of revolutionising the space launch industry for the second time in a decade or so. Plus Elon wants to get to Mars yesterday. All of this being the case, I suspect Starship will be showered with money to get it flying reliably in shorter order than F9.

>>12215342
They went from ground breaking in Boca to possibly 15km starship in 1 year with Superheavy being put together right now. That's a lot of progress for the most advanced/next gen/innovate/giant space ship. If NASA were to do this, it would take 20+ years to get the paper designs right.

>>12215314
>Deliver humans to the moon under Artemis
this
using starships for lunar landings is stupid af. you need tons of refueling flights just to lift dry mass around. at that point even old space could unironically be cheaper

>>12215314
They went from launching Starhopper from a dirt lot to SN5/6 and an unrecognizable production facility in a year and you think it's going to take over a decade to send Starships to Mars? That's hilarious

>>12215399
>even old space could be cheaper
If Starship is even within an order of magnitude of the launch price target, it will be cheaper to do all of those refueling flights than most heavy launch vehicles while being much more efficient in cost per payload delivered.

>>12215399
>>12215449
Couldn't you just use some of the 100 ton cargo space to be more fuel for extra Delta V?

You don't need 100 tons of shit if your only goal is to plant a flag and then leave, and you already need a special lunar version anyway because of the regolith.

>>12215089
You need to hit that cadence in tanker flights to refuel a Starship for TMI.

>>12215490
If you're literally just doing flag planting you wouldn't bring more fuel, you'd do less refueling missions and take less cargo. But flag planting is old and busted, why not take a full cargo and start an actual base?

>>12215504
Moonship needs to land directly on top of some Chinese lander.

>>12214156
I think I have a real answer

>China planning to invade Taiwan
>US pledged to defend Taiwan
>US can't put troops in Taiwan because China has publicly stated that Taiwan is China and stationing troops there would constitute an invasion of China and would result in a war
>America needs to figure out how to defend Taiwan without having any of their own military already stationed there
>Taiwan doesn't have enough money/isn't spending enough money to kit out their military properly on their own

>Starship comes in
>US can flood Taiwan with anti-ship missiles, electronic warfare equipment, naval mines, and other really useful conventional warfare shit on 2 hours notice, without needing to station anything in the country before the outbreak of the war

>>12214370
That's what all the Space Force contracts and hype are for. Elon knows SpaceX can't rely on NASA under a Biden administration.

>((Weinstein))
every fucking time

>>12215679
Stop reading Twitter.

>>12215679
Take a closer look at that snout!

>>12215679
Let them whine. They can't stop progress.

>>12215679

>>12215679
>every fucking time
It really is.

>>12214022
how does the deorbit step supposed to work

>>12215679
>the nose

>>12215513
>achieve space age tech
>use it for waging chimp wars for muh trees
>go back to stone age
Mother Nature regulates herself.

>>12215769
dumb smugposter

>>12214470
BPS.Space is pretty cool

>>12215769
>anime poster
>retarded post

checks out

>>12215748

I guess either with a small, handheld rocket or before ejecting, the craft from which he ejects from, puts him on a orbit that dips into the atmosphere or towards the ground.

>>12215820
you can see some cannisters with him in the diagram that get thrown away, maybe that's what those are.

>>12215820
it would be tricky as hell to fire handheld rocket retrograde without spinning all over the place

>>12214037
Even NASA isn’t immune from politicization. This was such a power grab and most of the scientific community lost respect for NASA after he was appointed

>>12215847
"The scientific community" does very little to impress me with its ability to actually manage projects, and such criticism bears very little weight. Bridenstine has done excellent work.

>>12215847
Got some citation for that claim or is this just pointless bitching?

>>12215847
Bullshit, even the reddit space community likes jim now, going from strong opposition when he was first nominated. Jim is a uniter. I will be sad to see him go. Hopefully he continues to be involved at nasa after the election.

>>12215879
Is there any talk of him being replaced anytime soon?

>>12215847
How was Jim's appointment politicization? Because he thought that climate change wasn't primarily man made?

>>12215884
lori garver if it's biden, jeff dewit if it's trump

>>12215891
Are either of these good picks or are they total duds?

>>12214735
For starship landers it'd be more similar to this, just drop 1000s of shock troops way behind enemy lines to fuck shit up while the main invasion creates a beach head. Yes most of them are expected to die.

>>12215847

>>12215907
>>12214735
>>12214340
STARSHIPS ARE NOT FOR COMBAT DROPS. I don't know where this retarded idea keeps coming from. Starship is for global logistics between major staging areas. You're not just going to fucking ODST into combat in a Starship, even a Jihadi with a 23mm Toyota can shoot down a subsonic skydiver phase Starship.

>>12215897
Lori is fine, the other guy is creepy.

>>12215920
Yeah but is he likely to be a good nasa admin?

>>12215041
the issue with you is that you're pumping out oldspace timelines where the "decade away" slot is for "thing we're not working on"
that's what it means, anon

>>12215891
i've got some suspicions that the only reason to replace bridenstine with dewit is that boeing's mad over losing HLS and SLS's role being pared down to basically nothing, but that's just conjecture

>>12215919
What if the starship pops open, lets out landing pods, and then maneuvers away to land somewhere safer? It could do that miles up.

>>12215919
Thats why you HALO drop out of the starship

>>12215202
no
>>12215897
they're both total shitheaps of choices
Lori hates planetary science, Jeff hates Big Jim and wants to give all the money to Boeing

>>12215919
Dumb. Paratroopers exist. Helicopers exists. Airplanes exists. Jet planes exists. All of them will travel slower than Starship and all of them are combat tools.

>>12215919
This wtf this thread is actually retarded.

>>12215769
>Noooo humans are supposed to be magical beings with souls made by God, not animals who act like animals!

Kys
War is badass

>>12215966
Okay so fuck lori but why does jeff love boeing? Did they promise him a job after he's no longer nasa admin?

>>12215796
t. some ape

>>12215981
Yes, Jeff is bought and paid for by Boeing

>>12215920
>Lori is fine

No she isn’t fucking retard
She wants to dismantle space exploration entirely

>>12215987
>>12215988
Well that sucks, guess artemis is kill

>>12215991
yes, if they remove Jim you can forget NASA

>>12215983
Humans are apes. Study biology for five seconds.

>>12215970
Paratroopers and helicopters are the only similar type of tool to a starship drop and in neither of those cases will a single 50cal cause the whole vehicle and everyone inside it to go up in a giant ball of fire.

>>12215994
Trump would still do Artemis or at least keep funding it

>>12215988
>She wants to dismantle space exploration entirely
source?

>>12215907
Look at all those bio-drones, happily fullfiling their pre-programmed groupal behavior, while also believing whatever shit cover narrative some rich fuck invented so that they die for his own material interests.
The idea of mixing simian wars with space tech is atrocious.

>>12215999
You've never heard of airplanes or jet hover over in warzone?

>>12216009
yes, but you can forget it

>>12215999
You can shoot down any helicopter by magdumping an M1911 at it

>>12216009
All the funding in the world doesn't help if your new administrator requires that the lunar lander launches on orange rocket

>>12216019
she said in the past that she wants nasa to prioritize earth science. whether or not she was serious or just trying to ingratiate herself to democrats is an open question. she's since said she supports artemis though.

>>12216023
>Nooo stop behaving like humans have always behaved! Be a low testosterone beta male instead!

>>12215995
We are actually primates and not apes.
Still doesn't mean we should chimp out with whatever thing falls in our hands.

>>12215983
Yes.

>>12216035
>We are actually primates and not apes

Wrong fucking reta

>>12216034
But then at some point humans will nuke the fuck out of themselves.

>>12216024
Helicopters are generally well armoured and the beefier ones can take small SAM hits and walk it off, Jets don't hover you fuckwit.

>>12216028
ogey

>>12216032
>she said in the past that she wants nasa to prioritize earth science. whether or not she was serious or just trying to ingratiate herself to democrats is an open question. she's since said she supports artemis though.
Hopefully she'll pull a Big Jim and reveal that she's a huge spaceflight nerd who wants to make this industry great.

>>12216054
Low IQ. Jets hover all the time. Air planes hover all the time. The hover distance is however greater due to greater velocities.

>>12216035
>We are actually primates and not apes

Wrong fucking retard shut the hell up
“Ape” is a term for a member of the clade “hominoidea”, which is a monophyletic clade composed of two smaller clades, the great apes and the lesser apes. Humans are hominidae, the great apes, a clade we share with chimps, gorillas, bonobos, and orangutans.

>Still doesn't mean we should chimp out with whatever thing falls in our hands.

It’s fun and cool so let’s do it.

>>12216064
>semantics

>>12216037
It is all the Ayyys' fault. They Ayys shouldn't have given us agriculture and all the other tech. Those things are not in our nature.
But ayys must be some spacial turbo-apes themselves, or maybe just trolls. Anyone with a neuron can see that it was not a good idea to give to the apes.
They also didn't finish the job.
The absolute state.

SCRUBX
R
U
B
X

>>12216052
>But then at some point humans will nuke the fuck out of themselves.

And? Ascension and collapse is the way of civilizations. Something new and more evolved will arise from the ashes.

>>12216090
>ayys thought it would be funny to give a particularly clever species of hairless ape fire
>they laughed a bit and left
>they operate in timescales of millions of years and assume we do too
>several million years later the Ayys come by to check on us ('Oumaoma)
>they created a race of living, breathing, shitposting, rocket launching, space faring, radio blasting monkey meat
>our memes are more advanced than any cultural artifact they've ever seen
>HIT THE GAS THE APES ARE FUCKING BUILDING THINGS WE GOTTA RUN

>>12216112
Humans aren’t hairless.

>>12216090
>Those things are not in our nature.

Prove it.

> Anyone with a neuron can see that it was not a good idea to give to the apes.

Prove it

>>12216118

>>12216130
>Hair in picture

>>12216125
ok

>>12216130
>Jeff Who
>human

>>12216093
>ascension and collapse
>Something new and more evolved
But we will never get to develop the really cool tech unless we break the cycle, or at least unless we get enough tech to modify ourselves and delete the self-destructive animal programming.

>>12216156
>Become soulless machine slaves haha

Atheists are demented.

What does /sci/ make of this. Thought of a Planet in the ISOHDFS 27 Galaxy named Mare by Humans. The Polity know to Humans as the Marean Cooperative is a Polity governed by two Marean Species from different Phyla. One of them being a Species with a Gas-Bladder and Fingered Flippers near it's Mouth while the other Species is shaped like Cigar with two Tubes on it's sides for jet propulsion and a line of Fin Tendrils along it's Underside. They both use spaceships with an incased thick atmosphere and water since neither can walk on land as there is no exposed land on Mare.

>>12216136
those eyebrows are painted on

>>12216112
>hairless ape
This must have been their fault as well. I bet my ass they mixed us with some pre-existing hairless species, or else they outright genetically engineered us.
Evolutively we should be fully covered with hair. It doesn't make sense that after years of adaption we suffer sun burns.

>>12216156
What if we just rode out the nukes on Mars and Luna

>>12216170
Forgot the ?

>>12216175
>Evolutively we should be fully covered with hair

Nope. Hair loss evolved to facilitate more efficient sweating because we are endurance runners. The best endurance runners of any living animal, actually.

>>12216170
does Mare have oil?
does Mare have helium-3?
have the Mareans conquered nuclear fusion?
do they have any other exciting tech beyond our current understanding?

>>12215513
>use space for earth to earth military delivery
>China goes apeshit and chaffs the shit out of loe, rendering all satellites useless for the entire planet
Sounds real neato

>>12216188
You can just armor stuff you put up lol

>>12216175
I believe it to be for thermoregulation associated with upright bipedalism.

>>12216125
>>Those things are not in our nature.
>
>Prove it.
Too fast too recent. If it was, and assumming we have been on Earth for millions of years, we should have developed it before. That it was all "discovered" in the last thousand years it is highly improbable. The explanation being ofc, external (((influences)))

>>12216188
Intentionally starting Kessler syndrome would be such a significant national security threat that the response would rise to the nuclear level. One good shot on the Three Gorges Dam and there's no more China.

And then we go clean up the scrap in orbit with Starships and big nets.

>>12216195
>and assumming we have been on Earth for millions of years

Modern humans didn’t evolve until the last 200,000-300,000 years dumbass.

>>12216195
we haven't been on earth for millions of years. Only ~200000

>>12216184
Lots of oil though since the foundation of the cooperative, exploitation of irreplaceable resources is illegal. They utilize ionised gas (Plasma) for energy purposes. Solar power is inefficient considering Mare orbits a K-Type Star.

>>12216183
Running is retarded. It is an energy killing activity. There is a reason animals don't do it unless they need to.

Also hair is desirable in higher latitudes to isolate from winter cold.

>>12216210
>Running is retarded.

>>12216188
>China goes apeshit and chaffs the shit out of loe, rendering all satellites useless for the entire planet
Sounds like a good way to make the whole world hate you, and never want to do anything with you ever again.

>>12216210
>t. 500 pound retard

>>12216209
Trade with them for plasma drives. Strap them to armed Starships. Liberate the oil.

>>12216210
>There is a reason animals don't do it unless they need to.

have you ever been around mammals, anon?

>>12216203
So what. Still a lot of time, considering agriculture is a neolithic thing, let alone metallurgy, writting...

If we evolved independently, shit should have been discovered before.

>>12216234
>If we evolved independently, shit should have been discovered before.

Doesn’t follow. The probability of beginning agriculturalism may simply be low, especially since hunter-gatherers were outright more nourished than the first beta male agriculturalists.

>>12216234
>can't spell "writing"
>expects anyone to believe his theories about technological progress and human development

>>12216188
>China goes apeshit and tries to chaff the shit out of leo
>gets one launch off before all their launch apparatus get deorbit'd upon

>>12216232
Have you lived among them for a week, or only observed your dog in his poop walk?
These predators will sleep most of the time to conserve energy. Wolves will cover some distances at energy-saving pace. They will usually run only for hunting.

The larger the body the more important it becomes to save energy. Watch some lions or bears documentary.

>>12214339
the only hope of stopping even 70s-80s era weapons (which we have certainly surpassed) is to stop them before they launch or at least before they leave the atmosphere. Once they've re-entered, I don't believe anything in the world can stop multiple independently (analog) targeted warheads moving at Mach 23 - and that's just a single missile when there are thousands.

>>12216234
>if something happened once, it must have happened before that
Do you start counting at '2'?

>>12216251
We get it anon you’re s lazy fat retard who hasn’t ran a mile in his life

>>12216251
yes anon, you need to conserve every calorie you can procure, just like a wild lion.

>>12216251
If lions and bears are so smart being lazy bastards why are we the apex predator and they aren't?

We have to expend significant societal effort just to not accidentally make the inferior predators extinct.

>>12216249
nice ad-hominem, my pan-troglodites fellow.

>>12214374
>Just understand that SLS is a jobs program, not a space flight program. If it gets off the launch pad it means it's failed.

>>12215919
>You're not just going to fucking ODST into combat in a Starship, even a Jihadi with a 23mm Toyota can shoot down a subsonic skydiver phase Starship.

Exactly, but shoot down this

>>12216258
it's cheaper to build a kinetic kill vehicle than it is to build a nuclear warhead. that's how you stop them.

>>12216229
The Gas-Filled Marean Species are extremely big and are responsible for the primary defense of the Cooperative. The second Species is extremely fast and is armed with a Venomous Proboscis for a Mouth. Also their ships are armed with gravity disruptors which are harmful to Humanoids since they have had prior wars with Humanoids.

>>12215202
There isn't a foundry on Earth that can make a solid piece that large.

>>12216272
The problem with classic WW2 style paratroopers and the reason it's not really a thing anymore is that you can't carry that much armament on a dude with a parachute. You can carry a pistol, maybe a carbine, maybe a foldable anti-tank launcher of some type. Everything else has to be dropped separately and is at the mercy of the wind. The solution is mechanized paratroopers and helicopter drops. Pic related, but good luck doing pic related with a Starship.

>>12215919
>>12215999
Have you considered not dropping out of orbit on top of a fucking technical? There's a small response window for the defender and the entire earth's surface available as a staging point.

>>12216274
that only works if you know where they are coming from with enough time, even a paltry minuteman 3 has three warheads each with advanced analog guidance. At Mach 23, by the time you detect the warheads it will already be too late for any kind of interception, you're best best it to have interceptor "flak" around suspected targets and that likely wont save you from multiple missiles each with multiple warheads (by the 80s missiles with 8 or more warheads became common)

>>12216283
>on Earth
If only there was a nearby planet with a thin, inert atmosphere, lower gravity, and unbelievably plentiful iron oxide literally covering the entire surface waiting to be refined

MARTIAN MEGAFORGES WHEN ELON

>>12216272
>deploys parachute
>Inshallah mohammed, see here how Allah has shown us the enemy

Dropping from orbit is no different from a regular HALO drop except that you need way more gear and you vehicle is much harder to shoot down. The zogbots are still just as easy to pop on the way down with your choice of weapon.

>>12216290
Yes, the obvious solution is to stop pretending Starship is equipped for combat drops and to just land at a nearby FOB. Where you can set up a Boca Chica tier pad and tank farm to send it back, instead of "lol we dropped a bunch of Starships in the middle of Azerbaijan, now what"

>>12215202
Ridiculously difficult, you would get almost the same result with a specialised super wide roller that rolls one gigantic sheet and wrapping it like a burrito with a single weld down the vertical axis.

>>12215919
You could if the Starship dumped a spray of chaff mixed with one ton canisters full of smart submunitions which would burst open and shower everything within several miles of it's landing site with micromissiles. The submunitions themselves can deploy small parachutes and slow down, acting as both extra targets the enemy would have to parse from the actual Starship, they could even be equipped with ECCM pods to attack and blind or confuse enemy tracking and targeting systems while the primary ship performs its landing burn.
Mahmoud-al-Jihad can't shoot down a starship with his hadji technical if a dozen micromissiles target his truck and shred it with hand grenade sized airburst fragmenting explosives.

https://youtu.be/7RvhlWiSvEk

>>12216302
Yes, with enough jamming and electronic warfare you can get anything through air defenses. Turkey proved that recently in Syria where they were able to sit drones right on top of blind and helpless Tor missile systems.

That still doesn't make ODST Starships a GOOD idea. Especially in the terminal phase, they're big and slow and shiny enough to be manually engaged.

>>12216296
Would honestly depend on the nature of the combatant. HALO dropping would be pointless to something like this.

>>12216310
Maybe not good, but FUN. You can send everyone who's too much of an adrenaline junky for flying planes to the Starship corps.

>>12216326
The military hates fun. No fun allowed. The closest they ever got to allowing fun was the M18 Hellcat.

Starship will act like a C-5 Galaxy, operating between cases in the US and whatever large airfield is captured in the same region as the front. Cargo will be forwarded by conventional C-130s and LAVs.

>>12216300
I'm not even talking practicality here, the argument I'm seeing is just nonsensical. There is no reason you would ever have a contested landing, period. The enemy, even if they have all the most up to date surveillance equipment in the world, doesn't have time to intercept a landing. Even moreso than an ICBM, because those at least have a predictable path. A Starship could maneuver all the way into the hypersonic re-entry. By the time Jose knows where to take his technical, the landing is basically done.

>>12216330
Please Anon, don't crush my dreams of being a Starship Shock Trooper.

>>12216341
Landing on a planet would only be useful to secure positions and resources which could be costly in the long term. Most war in space probably involves orbital bombardment to surrender.

>>12216341
>there is no reason you would ever have a contested landing
Because anons here seem to think you can and should literally drop a Starship onto or just behind enemy trench lines and everything will go brilliantly. I'm arguing that Starship is only fit for use as a strategic space lifter, and that you'd really rather not drop it in range of enemy SHORAD. If you're landing at a friendly airfield a couple hundred miles from the front, you're absolutely correct. But if you're trying to use it to YEEHAWW your way directly into combat, you're going to get shot at during terminal descent.

>>12216300
>>12216341
I think everybody is missing the most obvious problem

>somewhere in the shitty made in China knock off of the situation room
>hey, we have a bunch of radar contacts that launched from America and are heading for us
>"that's interesting, you know we are in a world war with the United States, I think I know what that could be"
>get nuked because there's no way to distinguish between a Minuteman and a Starship

>>12216350
The obvious solution is to nuke China first, use space assets to kill their return strike, and then land Starships wherever we want.

>>12216348
Now you've completely lost the plot because the original conversation was about the US military's interest in using Starship as a strategic spacelifter.
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2020/10/08/u-s-military-partners-with-spacex-to-explore-using-starship-for-point-to-point-travel/

>>12216350
>there's no way to distinguish between a minuteman and Starship
The fact that Starship is like ten times the size, has two fewer stages, and probably has a military aircraft transponder don't figure into this?

>>12216360
I think that an early warning system would detect the launch and then just be tracking the speed and the trajectory.

I don't think they're sophisticated enough to distinguish between different kinds of stuff, particularly during the early phases of ascent when the decision would be made whether or not to use nuclear weapons.

>>12216360
So in essence. They'll just be hired guns for dodgy space corps like Weyland-Yutani.

>>12216372
Starship has a significantly different (lower acceleration, fewer stages) launch profile that would be immediately distinguishable even if your only data is exhaust temperature and speed (ie a primitive thermal camera chilling in orbit).

>>12216380
The only real space corporations right now are SpaceX and maybe ULA if you're unbelievably generous. Blue Origin will be joining the fun shortly.

>>12216349
>Because anons here seem to think you can and should literally drop a Starship onto or just behind enemy trench lines and everything will go brilliantly.
And I'm saying with current tech there's basically nothing they could do to stop that. For the most part, 'behind enemy lines' is not a magical place where every few square kilometers has an emplacement ready and waiting. You need time to coordinate a response.
That's not to say that dropping Starships behind enemy lines is the practical thing to do. There's a lot wrong with it. But 'every one of sheepfuckerland's 300,000 square kilometers has a 50cal with your name on it' isn't one of those things.

>>12216384
Blue wont be doing any p2p launches. So any planetary conflicts that involve fast long range travel will be limited to Starship for the forseeable decades.

>>12216395
That depends very much on the particular situation you're dropping the Starships into and whether you care about ever getting them back. The Gobi desert for example is pretty much desolate and undefended. Beijing is not. If you're dropping them very near the front lines (to create an encirclement, for example) there very well might be bored guards with DShKs behind every tree.

Starship is a lot like any other strategic airlifter. It requires significant facilities to take off, it's vulnerable during landing, but your average goatherder can't touch it at cruising altitude. Can you land one in the Gobi desert? Sure, but why? There's nothing there, and anything worth defending will be defended if the enemy is competent.

>>12216384
I bet military contractors will conduct independent operations and will be the first to do asteroid mining.

Fuck it, Starship CAS. Let's do it.
>Starship on orbit
>fill the nose with 100 tons of hellfire missiles (which, for those keeping track at home, is 2000 Hellfires
>refuel in orbit
>reenter above your target with full fuel tanks (spicy entry)
>as soon as the plasma clears, start launching hundreds of hellfires per minute
>once you're out of hellfires, hit the gas and fuck off back to Boca Chica

>>12216406
Wrong. Blue Lindbergh is happening, and happening fast

crew-1 delayed: https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2020/10/10/nasa-spacex-crew-1-launch-update/

>>12216344
your dreams are stupid

>>12216406
I know criticizing Starcraft physics is dumb, but why do MULE pods burn prograde towards the ground until just before touchdown?

>>12216441
Yeah well your mom gay.

>>12216438
It was because of the falcon 9, not the capsule?

Is there a place for me? Will dreamchaser EVER fly a manned version? Or were they fucked over by Starliner

>>12216406
I thought whole deal with Shepard was space Amazon.

>>12216469
I heard rumors that the space force might want some of that dreamchaser action

https://youtu.be/DdTYMry7fq0

>>12216471
No. Sheperd is more like jumping on a giant trampoline. Trampolines done go sideway, they go up and down.

>>12216466
yeah, they want a detailed report on the recent incident from spacex

>>12216474
They are building a “space station” with SNC’s shooting star trunk for a shitty cubesat hub. Lmao I don’t even think they give a shit about the actual dream chaser. Hope they give them enough money to keep them alive though

>>12216481
what recent incident

>>12216474
The longer the Spaceforce exists the more it's falling into the military habit of ordering every shiny new toy it sees.

>>12216483
a turbopump on the GPS III launch gave an anomalous pressure reading

>>12216485
It would help if the space force had any toys of it's own.
Air force won't even hand over the X-37b.

>>12216483
it's right in the first paragraph bro
>additional time for SpaceX to complete hardware testing and data reviews as the company evaluates off-nominal behavior of Falcon 9 first stage engine gas generators observed during a recent non-NASA mission launch attempt

>>12216491
Dude, what if we filled Starship with guided munitions and used it as a high atmosphere missile bus

Let special forces designate, just drop a shitload of Hellfires over the target area

>>12216412
>Starship is a lot like any other strategic airlifter.
Except that you have about 4 minutes to react to whatever it wants to do with any kind of accuracy. That's not a lot of mobilization time even in the vicinity of a well defended area.

>>12216438
>Launch of NASA’s SpaceX Crew-1 mission to the International Space Station is now targeted for no sooner than early-to-mid November, providing additional time for SpaceX to complete hardware testing and data reviews as the company evaluates off-nominal behavior of Falcon 9 first stage engine gas generators observed during a recent non-NASA mission launch attempt. Through the agency’s Commercial Crew and Launch Services Programs partnership with SpaceX, NASA has full insight into the company’s launch and testing data.

>>12216491
>Each X-37b mission reportedly costs $200 million, and this is a conservative estimate
>The cost of a Dreamchaser unit from Sierra Nevada Corporation runs at about $40 million
Lmao FUCK Boeing I hope the x-37 missions get cancelled soon and all of its objectives gets transferred over to space force where they can use a dreamchaser or even a starship modified to do experiments. At the end of the day I'm pretty sure the only reason it exists is to scare enemies like China and it doesn't actually do anything. But two hundred million a pop?? I'm thinking Boeing is gay.

>>12216464
based

>>12216092
is this about GPS III's turbomachinery?

>>12216510
Don't be so fucking jovial yet. Dreamchaser is set to launch on ULA rockets, so it'll likely cost an arm and a leg per launch too.

>>12216504
>>12216514
Looks like it.

>>12216092
The turbo pump pressure spike?

>>12216525
The reason for the T2 second abort a few weeks ago.

>>12216520
I suppose you could launch one on New Glenn™, if we ever see the thing come to fruition. Honestly I hate Boeing so much I'd rather see the DoD support sierra nevada even if it cost them more money. But yeah launching on a ULA rocket will still cost a lot, will probably delay at the pad a lot, and most frustratingly will still be bringing money in for Boeing

>>12216520
>>12216530
Is there any reason it can't launch on a falcon 9/heavy?

>>12216475
You know just realized, how does starship control itself in the yaw axis? How would it stay out of a flat spin?

>>12216498
Look at the range of something like an S-400 or HQ-9. Starship doesn't have a lot of cross range capability, it's not Shuttle and the flaps aren't wings.

>>12216538
Ummm the only thing stopping them is probably the fact that they don't really have buyers yet. They probably pitched ULA as the launch vehicle because it makes the government happy. But yeah it's possible to launch on a Falcon Heavy

>>12216557
Aren't they in on the commercial cargo program?

>>12216540
RCS I guess? It's already in a stall for the entire entry profile so a vertical stabilizer would do fuck all.

>>12216540
Ultra high precision thrust vectoring, rcs is for fuckin noobs

spaceship get hot when come back to earth - why?

when it come back slow, less hot?

thakns

I have been thinking, and since everything indicates that america will have a massive market crash in the next few years, do you guys think that spacex military contracts(and maybe starlink) will be able to prop up the whole company when venture capital dries up and tesla crashes with the rest?

>>12214370
Falcon9 is turning in the workhorse of the US.
And the militairy really wants starlink to be real.
So they cant kill spaceX.

>>12216591
Fake

>>12216595
What is fake?

>>12216540
the flaps also work that way as well, aerodynamic forces push normal to the flat surface of the flap

>>12216554
>Starship doesn't have a lot of cross range capability, it's not Shuttle and the flaps aren't wings.
That's why I say 4 minutes, because that's the time it spends outside of hypersonic. Before that point, the flaps actually do act like wings with decent authority, which is basically the whole point.
>SAMs
SS should have 100-150 tons of payload. That's a lot of decoys, or just warheads, to use as a vanguard.

>>12216589
impossible to come back slow, space is fast
always fast so there is no slow
and fast is hot

>>12216600
You're personality

>>12216613
but why is fast hot?

>>12216631
>why is fast fast

>>12216631
fast = compression
compression = hot

>>12216655
Why is compression hot

>>12216631
Because that's how fluids work. If I'm standing on the edge of a pool and belly flop in it won't hurt. If I belly flop from the high board it will sting. If I jump off the golden gate bridge and belly flop it will kill me. Same thing with the atmosphere. If you are going really fast (as in all spacecrafts reentering) you have a lot of kinetic energy and the atmosphere abruptly gets in your way and compresses and heats up. If you are going WAY too fast (like let's say you just did a slingshot around the Moon or something and you are coming in REALLY hot) that atmosphere is going to be a huge problem and really heat shit up because you have a TON of energy you need to bleed off to get to safe landing speed.

>>12216658
it just is bro

>>12216658

Compression is energy. Heat is part of energy.

Make fist around ice-cubes, they melt into water even when fist is cold.

>>12216671
So like when I go down it gets hotter... because of compression and overburden pressure or whatever. I assume it is same as when I compress gas it gets hot.
But why, then, does the ocean get COLDER toward the bottom? Should not the ocean get HOTTER because of pressure?

>>12216678
right, that's why thermal vents are at the bottom of the ocean instead of the top

>>12216184
Worrying about helium3 is pointless, you can easily create it from a high neutron source like a fission reactor

>>12216678
Wait fuck that's actually a good question. I don't actually know desu

>OH NO NO NO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjZn9fHQMg0

>>12216678

Ocean not change a lot. Heat goes up like in air. Time passes (thousands of years) bottom of ocean gets cold.

>>12216693
Boing!

>>12216678
cold water has higher density than warm water

>>12216112
Can you trip so I can filter you?

>>12216671
No idiot pressure makes stuff solidify

>>12216540
in bellyflop mode you just make small adjustments with the fins, basically the same way a skydiver controls spin
otherwise it uses thrust vectoring and/or RCS like any other rocket

>>12216693
BASED hullo

>>12216702
Oh it's just because water is weird? Like if the oceans were a "normal" liquid would it get warmer?

>>12216699
Do you think Boeing are aware they are a laughing stock?

>>12216717
I have a feeling the ones that care about their reputation as engineers aren't too common anymore

>>12216716
no pretty much all liquids and gasses are more dense when cold, which is why spacex makes their oxygen and methane much colder than they need to be, near the freezing point rather than the boiling point

the water at the bottom of the ocean is as compressed as it will get (which is not much because water is incompressible) and has been for millions of years, so theres no generation of energy

the compression when you're entering the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds (space speed) happens all at once to air that was previously just chilling but is suddenly hit by a spacecraft going many many times faster than the air can move out of the way (the speed of sound) so it compresses in microseconds, generating immense heat and plasma

>>12216693
Holy shit the end of that video was nothing but bad news:
>Yeah he left because of "family matters" but it probably has something to do with the state of the capsule
>As we know, Boeing did not test all the spacecraft systems together. They tested them separately. This has lead to an advisory counsel that has deemed ALL spacecrafts need to test systems together
>SUPRISE MOTHERFUCKER most of the systems for Artemis are being built by Boeing and they didn't test any of these systems together. So something similar to Starliner could happen during Artemis I and they will have to delay to test systems

>>12216741
>>12216693

>The absolute state of Boeing.

How far the mighty have fallen. Once, a name uttered in awe, respect and pride but now so pathetic, so ridiculous, so clownesque that you allmost have to beg Allah for forgiveness for even uttering it.

>>12216759
>Ashes to ashes, dust to dust
>Boeing leaves this world not as a shooting star
>but as a peashooter

>>12216759
What’s with all this dorky, immature prose and sci fi zoomed bullshit in MY thread?

>>12216741
At least they addressed it but holy kek that NASA ever let them get away with not doing integrated testing to begin with, what the fuck did they expect?

>>12216788
I mean he isn't wrong lmao

>>12216716
a liquid getting hotter means its molecules are moving faster, which increases the space between them, which decreases the density, so it's not just specific to water

the only weird property water has is that its density peaks at around 4C (see table). this allows aquatic life to survive winters, because lakes etc. never freeze all the way to the bottom

>>12216741
>Boeing did not test all the spacecraft systems together
wtf

>>12216794 self reply
>watched
>wait they actually aren't addressing the issue at all, at least not for Artemis
KEK
After going close to a decade over deadline, they'd rather risk the mission than take the time to actually do integrated software testing. "Do as I say, not as I do" really rules the day on NASA's post-Shuttle safety-conscious image.

>>12216820
space was hard

>>12216827
if you think sls can't get cancelled then more failed missions means more $$$

>>12216820
i guess boomers never heard of unit vs integration testing

much of spacex's success came from explicitly using software engineering approaches in rocket development right from the start

>>12216796
you can be both right and a faggot at the same time

>>12216868
True... true

Artemis on a torch fission SRB, launched from Vabdenburg right over LA and San Fran

>>12216805
Is it just coincidence that water has a maximum density of almost 1000 kg per cubic meter?

Apparently this youtuber Mr Beast is going on Dear Moon.

>>12216940
No

>>12216944
is dear moon gonna be a dragon flying on a starship or have they ever explained it?

>>12216948
Does this look like a Dragon to you

>>12216940
The kilogram is literally based on mass of water of a certain volume

>>12216944
God damn dear moon just shouldn't happen. So many fags and marxists and youtube cringe will slingshot around the moon. Maybe I'm just trying to cope with the fact that I'm not going though

>>12216954
it looks like earth orbit

>>12216944
jesus christ dearmoon is gonna be so fucking gay. mz is a fuckin retard

>>12216944
>this is a recycled shirt
what a faggot lmao

>>12216963
>>12216959
/smg/ will be rooting for it to RUD when it's full of youtube influencers and kangz and rappers and instathots

>>12216983
what if that's musk's master plan?

>>12216958
Yea I figured I was just a retard lol

This makes me irrationally angry.

>>12216995
ends justify means for ol musky. if it takes sending a crew of zoomers around the moon to get an eccentric billionaire to put up funds, so be it

>>12217004
Shit, I can smell the desperation from here.

>>12217004
Yeah same I don't even want to watch dearmoon. It'll be decked out on social media and youtube like a fucking jake paul party or something

>>12216944
A fucking youtuber. LMAO

>>12216944
So far we have Ryan Gosling, Damien Chazelle, Ringo Starr, and Mr Beast. What the FUCK is MZ smoking?

>>12217027
When were these confirmed? Ryan Golsing, Ringo Starr?? Lmao what in the fuck

>>12217027
>Ringo Starr
Wait, seriously? The man not only managed to ride to fame on the coat tails of one of the most influential bands of all time, but now that fame gets him a free moon mission? Ringo has to be the luckiest man in human history.

>>12217032
>>12217035
Ryan and Ringo were both asked at least
https://youtu.be/Ot6WB9tNOW0

>>12216944
I think I threw up in my mouth

>>12216944
>>12217004

>>12217044
Ringo? That arthritic geriatric is going to survive a launch? lol.

>>12217004
>make a yt channel about rockets.
>learn a lot about the subject, make hour long informative videos on a semi-regular basis
>catch the eye of musk, talk to him all the time on twitter, interview him in person.
>a bunch of random yt faggots get to ride a ship to the moon before you, even though they dont really give a fuck about it and just doing it for publicity
Poor estronaut.

>>12216944
kill me

>>12217061
I'll take ringo over mrbeast any day god almighty

>>12217004
>>12217060
one reason space always appealed to me was that surely they wouldn't just send anyone there, at least not at first. i dreamt of leaving this gay earth and being on mars, living and working with the most competent and talented people

we're off to a bad start lads

>>12217083
This is why he was picked. Exposure.

Should have just been MZ and a harem of tiktok qts

>>12217086
That's what makes capitalism so much fun.

If the Chinese or oldspace was first to go back to the moon, it would be a bunch of boring, generic robot people doing pointless shit.

Instead we get a mish mash of whatever celebrities were dumb enough to sign up.

>>12217092
>>12217097
they should've picked belle delphine if they really wanted exposure

>>12217097
he was gonna do that dating thing where he tried to find some whore to go up with him. not sure why he changed his mind

>>12217104
kek

>>12217083
>bottom thumbnail sóyface meme.jpg

>>12217103
I like this take, but I'm still jealous of all these airheads

>>12217086
Colonization and tourism are two different things.

>>12217103
>If the Chinese or oldspace was first to go back to the moon, it would be a bunch of boring, generic robot people doing pointless shit.
would unironically prefer this

>>12217083
How the fuck do these things get any of those views? Fucking its garbage mundane shit. Is it the suey boy act? Why is there so much shitters watching it?

>>12217115
literally children

>>12217010
I'm not mad about the YouTuber getting selected (it's just PR and who cares, the technical achievement is what's important) but there's something about that slimey little soiboy trying to insert himself everywhere that triggers me irrationally. His lack of shame is off putting.

>>12217114
Embrace the surrealist clown world.

The future will be a time of tremendous uncertainty, but also an unrivalled freedom to create and to express.

>>12217115

>>12217121
whose lack of shame?

how much would you have to change to get merlin/raptor to run on other hydrocarbons

>>12217127

>>12217127
He's talking about e-astronaut. I don't fault him for it tho. Its the job of every space journo to get any sort of news/insider information by getting close to the first party subject.