/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12518242
What are the odds new shepherd actually lives up to the promises after all this time waiting for BO to actually put something in orbit?

>>12518242
SpaceX is nothing but a meme. SN9 will fail miserably, just like SN8 did

posting my question from previous thread:
newfag here, why do space nerds suddeny started hating on nasa?

>>12518272
t. common sense sceptic

>musk new starship thingie can lift 40kg
>STS could lift 1814369kg

>>12518290
>National Actual Spaceship Avoider
That should settle it

>>12518290
big orange rocket slow and bad

>>12518290
You already got your answers

>Its complicated. A few years ago Musk was seen as a snakeoil salesman. When he actually started landing stages and sending teslas up the atmosphere changed. People opened their eyes and saw how shitty contractors like boeing are, and how pathetic NASA has become. It took someone (like musk) to make that paradigm shift. Before musk we have always been told that spaceflight HAD to be slow because of muh safety and muh “space is hard” mindset. Then comes spacex who does more for cheaper

>They don't hate NASA, they hate politics thats put NASA in a conundrum. The largest expensive project for NASA right now is a political jobs program for many states. In the face of competition (SpaceX) and privatized space vehicles, the SLS vehicles are largely seen as legacy shit. People will argue that we need to fund it cause its "so close" to finished. That's just sunk cost fallacy at play. Between now and 2024(possibly) launch, it will cost US tax payers ~20+ Billion extra for the SLS program. They've already spent ~20 Billion so far in the last ~10 years of development.

>>12518290
because SpaceX has the best marketing in the galaxy whilst NASA do zero marketing.

NASA is faceless whilst SpaceX has cool twitter memes man

>>12518242
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRMDcC0QvFQ

Glorious. Starship 2.0 will be close to this.

>>12518306
>nuclear war with Musk's Mars colony be like:

>>12518297
Nazis made All our Spaceships Association

If Musk man is getting rockets to do bellyflops and shit then why don't they have rockets sent up vertically from planes or something ?

>>12518333
because paul allen died and stratolaunch lost funding

>>12518306
Cringe. This is what they will be going with when they decide to do their Starship II 36m variant in 2042
https://youtu.be/JtYisD7RqWk

>try to design a "largest possible" methalox Martian SSTO
>the spherical fuel tank is 66.2m in diameter
>the spherical oxidizer tank is 72.6m in diameter
>can carry about half an Iowa class battleship into LMO and back
>the whole thing fully loaded is as massive as 7.1 Iowas
>propellant is 6.02 Iowas
>needs 344 F-1 sized engines to get an on-pad TWR of 2
>the thrust puck is 98.8m in diameter
Please tell me if this is "too stupid"

>>12518347
>"possible"
I think at that point you might wind up with half the Martian atmosphere in your propellant tanks.

>>12518364
Hello there, blyat

>>12518347
then refuel in orbit, head out to Ceres, and steal an Iowa worth of ice for the terraforming project

>>12518341
why is it almost always a cunt wearing all the ppe doing these "experiments"?

>>12518382
marketing

>>12518355
I think I made a mistake having the upper limit to rocket size be defined as the largest propellant tank containing 200,000 m3. Although I'm not sure what other criteria I could use. No one really seems to know how many engines a rocket can have on one stage, and the payload amount I found is only a twentieth of the most sea-going cargo ships can carry.

>>12518296
>40kg
Musks new Starship is actually supposed to be stacked on top of another rocket.
>1814369kg
STS payload is artificially inflated by the weight of all the dead astronaut souls that clung to it.

>>12518242
Can someone redpill me on ESA's rockets?
Serious answers though I want real answers from rocket autists.

>>12518302
SpaceX doesn't do much marketing. Just one youtube channel, a website and the owner's twitter.

What did the SN8 launch prove after all? I really don't get the hype. Also, is Blue Origin on its way to overtake Sp*ceX as the GOAT spaceflight enterprise?

>>12518398
Ariane V was designed to be the booster Europe's Shuttle - Hermes, a lifting-body spacecraft that ESA never built. Now it does double manifests of satellites to GTO. It's a very bad concept (hydrolox+solids booster/sustainer) executed competently.

Their other rockets keep exploding.

>in 296,000 years, Voyager 2 should pass by the star Sirius

Where does /sfg/ think Humanity will be by then?

Light sabers and Starships ?

>>12518405
>What did the SN8 launch prove after all?
It proved basically the hardest parts of Starship - maneuvering with RCS and flaps, belly flop, pivot, and landing burn. The only thing that failed was methane pressure ran too low at the end.

Blue Origin still has not flown one rocket to orbit so no.

>>12518398
>engines from France
>boosters from Italy
>tanks from Spain
>avionics from Germany
>assembled in Poland
>inspected in Ireland
>stored in Luxembourg
>inspected again in Greece
>loaded onto a ship in Estonia
>inspected yet again in Portugal
>shipped to French Guiana
>doesn't launch because Romania didn't feel included enough

>>12518398
They are decent for getting a satellite into orbit and then getting dumped in the ocean. Since this is the entirety of the European space program's ambition, they got the job done that they were designed for. Now they have Ariane VI coming up and it looks like the same shit on a different day and it's an ok rocket by old space standards.
Then you look around, notice that Falcon 9 is fully operational and matured for years now and realize that this shit is already a decade in old space time out of date.

>>12518405
That Starship is perfectly controllable in all phases of flight, despite being welded together in a shed tent in half a year?

Why bother designing the engine of your paper rocket sketch when you can just say “.one giant pressure fed combustion chamber”
And a nice 30 meter wide nozzle

>>12518411
>It's a very bad concept (hydrolox+solids booster/sustainer) executed competently.
I wonder what about the new designs - Ariane 6, Vega-C and space rider (reusable something).
https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Transportation/Access_to_space_and_back
I checked today budget NASA's and ESA's budgets and it's $22B for NASA and ESA has about 35% of that.

Dubs and SN9 fails tremendously

>>12518418
That's not how it works retard. The vast majority of the construction and assembly is done in Germany and France, then it goes to FG. Don't just make shit up, half the countries you mentioned aren't even partners in A5.

>>12518445
Guess Elon's going to mars this decade after all

>>12518405
Watch the recap retard
https://youtu.be/_qwLHlVjRyw
It explicitly tells you what milestones were accomplished and what they mean

>>12518444
>Ariane 6
It was thought up to compete with the vertically integrated production of the falcon 9. Not the several times upgraded Falcon 9. Not the reusable Falcon 9. But one of the early ones that was just cheaper because they didn't ship it around a continent.
Well now Ariane 6 is almost here and guess what? It's gonna be more expensive per launch than originally planned.
So it can't even compete with an expendable Falcon 9 Block 5. Let alone a reusable one. Let alone Starship.
Europe considered forcing its member countries to use it for a few missions so they could even get the production rolling.

>>12518448
How much of an assblasted yuropoor do you have to be to take that post seriously

>>12518242
this looks about the right size for the W I D Eship

>>12518466
The guy asked for real answers, I'm just pointing out you're an autist.

>>12518456
>So it can't even compete with an expendable Falcon 9 Block 5. Let alone a reusable one. Let alone Starship.
What the hell? Did SpaceX buy all the engineers? What budget does SpaceX have?

>>12518478
Musk is the second richest person on the planet now

>>12518482
>Musk is the second richest person on the planet now
He pays from his own pocket? He surely gets some money from NASA/ESA for launches.

>why yes, i perceive Blue Origin as being the greatest modern spaceflight company, how could you tell?

>>12518476
tbf whenever I see a post ask for "serious answers only" I think they're looking for anything but serious

>>12518405
Starship is a steel pipe and already does more impressive things than new shepherd

>>12518500
The New Shepard dildo on your desk gave it away

>>12518500
>t. Jeff Who
We both know that is not true anon.
I would love for BO to contribute to spaceflight more but just saying it won't change the reality.

>>12518478
SpaceX develops rockets like software. Fail fast and integrate continuously. Everyone else develops rockets like a government office doing university projects. So massive amounts of red tape trying to ensure the perfect safety records of highly experimental, often unfocussed and sometimes half-assed components. So nothing ever gets integrated.

A reality in life is that good management can make great shit happen fast with few resources while terrible management can mean that nothing gets done even with unlimited resources over fast timeframes.
Timelines and results aren't just a function of money and manpower.

>>12518498
Yeah nah, he is pockets deep in that NASA and military money, on top of the money from the commercial launches on Falcon 9

>>12518256
Slim

>>12518272
If SN9 fails as miserably as SN8 did, it would be a massive success

>all these new rockets

but why?
when we built the ISS, sent satellites and drones to mars and humans to the moon ?

>>12518498
He doesn't actually have any money.
All his "richness" is in his stocks of the companies he owns which go through the roof since he manages them very well.
Most of his actual cash is loans from banks. If he actually tried to cash in all his "money" the stocks would tank.
I don't think he even got any salary from his managing positions.

starhopper doing its best star impression

>>12518519
And it’s a giant committee program never designed to make any money so you just have 100 people demanding to be included

Naturally you or I could see Ariane 6 was going to be a disaster the very time Spacex first landed a booster
But an institution can’t just cancel a program because it’s a bad idea...

Anyone excited for SLS 5th attempt at a wet dress rehearsal?

>>12518290
NASA is a bureaucratic mess which is helpless to do anything, and the biggest companies that worked closest with it for the past 5 decades have all evolved into cost plus parasites, with Boing the worst example. NASA is also extremely old and slow in terms of their thinking, and it shows. They can't even seem to hire a half decent director for their fucking livestreams, it's all shit. Don't even get me started on the 25 year old cameras and 30 year old launch CGI tracking software.

>>12518531
No rocket built since 1972 has been capable of re-doing Apollo let alone exceeding the Saturn V's capabilities. Starship is the first to change that.

>>12518519
>over fast timeframes
*vast
Time to sleep.

>>12518527
>failure = success
Here, have some cope

>>12518306
No orbital rocket will ever launch submerged in the water and no Sea Dragon style rocket will ever be built because rocket nozzles that big have extreme combustion instability and would be immediately destroyed by vibrations, get over it.

>>12518333
Because air launch sucks, it limits the mass of your rocket and doesn't offer more than three to five percent delta V savings.

>>12518398
Ariane 5 is okay and better than any oldspace rocket from the US. They actually get commercial payloads.
Vega was in a similar boat until it became a meme from its dual failures. There's supposed to be an upgraded version launching soon, but both versions will probably be BTFO by upcoming private small/mid-size rockets.
Ariane 6 is Euro Vulcan: a feverish attempt to match the Falcon 9 with half-measures. Europe could have a much worse rocket to assure its access to space, but it'll be outdated quick.

>>12518548
>because rocket nozzles that big have extreme combustion instability and would be immediately destroyed by vibrations
Then how big can bipropellant engines get, theoretically speaking?

>>12518347
Why so small, anon? I'm sure you could get more payload by doubling the propellant volume and launching it from a 500 km long magnetic accelerator track mounted to the slope of Olympus Mons.

>>12518548
>because rocket nozzles that big have extreme combustion instability
Do we actually know that? Has anyone ever run something like this by the according softwares and maybe spent 10 minutes on coming up with potential fixes? It's not the 60s anymore. This stuff doesn't need to be brute forced with trial and error anymore.

>>12518519
You must be a retard if you think that hardware is like software.
Software is cheap to modify and redo, and throw away. Hardware is not, because it is physical things.
Moreover, most software projects fail.

>>12518347
There's not going to be any pad after thing takes off. There's not going to be any fucking state when it does.

>>12518563
>Do we actually know that?
The F-1 had the beginnings of it.

Is it true that (((oldspace))) are cooperating with aliens in an effort to slow down future accomplishments by spaceX, which, were they to be fulfilled, would inevitably reveal there's alien life outside of earth, and in our solar system, specifically in mars, beyond any feasible chance of it being covered up by the government?

>>12518374
Sup Ivan

This is the core module of the chong space station (CSS).
Launching next year.
Yes, it is a soviet DOS module ripoff. So what, China is the only country doing shit.
It will also have a telescope.

>>12518234
Well if you can factory produce cars and airplanes then why not rockets ?

Final design of the CSS.
It looks more elegant that MIR.
Hopefully some astronauts from ESA will be invited.

>>12518390
>Although I'm not sure what other criteria I could use.
Bigger is literally always better. However, you can only go so tall with an engine cluster of maximum packing density and a certain thrust per unit area. I think a better option than some arbitrary tank volume would be to look at fineness ratio; Let's just assume that you only ever want the rocket to be as wide as it is tall, at a maximum. Starship+super heavy will be ~122 meters tall, and is built to launch on Earth. On Mars with its 0.38 G that means a raptor powered single stage vehicle could be 321 meters tall, and given our fineness ratio limit, could also be 321 meters wide. That's a total volume of 2.6x10^7 cubic meters, and given subcooled methalox's bulk density of 888 kg/m^3 would have a mass of around 23,088 million tons. The dry mass would be an additional ~2308 million tons on top of that. Payload mass is left as an exercise to the reader. Also, you should use electromagnetic launch assist.

>>12518500

>>12518591
>chong
Couldn't get anymore chinese than that
Also, on the eventuality that is them making a twin station, they should name it "the cheech"

What if the chinese beats SpaceX ?

Moar pics.
CSS has been 10 years in the making.

>>12518519
I considered this as a possible explanation, thanks for pointing it out.

>>12518608
In what way?
To Mars?
The Moon?

>>12518602
>Hopefully some astronauts from ESA will be invited.
Why?

>>12518539
>No rocket built since 1972 has been capable of re-doing Apollo let alone exceeding the Saturn V's capabilities. Starship is the first to change that.
Is this shit real?
Did retarded American managers really forgot to make documentation?

>>12518607
Names in pic related.

>>12518608
The odds are in their favor when it comes to spacefaring and technological innovation. They literally can't lose, worst they can do is rrose, which means fuck-all to us engrish speakers

>>12518618
>Is this shit real?
Yes. The Shuttle was supposed to be a crew taxi and satellite repair truck as a single part of a larger Space Transportation System, including heavy lift boosters like the Saturn V, nuclear orbital rockets and propellant depots. Congress, Nixon, and 70s NASA absolutely assfucked the country on this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Transportation_System

>>12518616
Because the burgers don't give enough seats.

>>12518618
It is real. America has been physically incapable of sending a man to the moon since Apollo ended. This is a render of Starship docked to NASA's currently planned "lunar gateway".

>>12518618

There has never been a demand or drive up until recently for returning to the moon/going past it. Rockets designed after the apollo program we're meant to suit other needs rather then deep space exploration.

Core module replica in the swimming pool.

>>12518627
LMAO more like a lunar gateway docked to a Starship.

>>12518630
>Rockets designed after the apollo program we're meant to suit other needs
political oned

>>12518478
Thinking that an organization needs a massive budget or more engineers to accomplish things is exactly what old space wants you to believe, because it means if you are a supporter of space you will be fighting tooth and nail to funnel more money into their pockets rather than coming for them to gut their organizations and trim all the fat to start getting shit done.

The day the Chinese make way for mars successfully is the day the US will throw hands to teach them a thing or two about human rights, dubs confirm

>>12518643
Yeah it's kinda silly. Starship mogs everything else ever built. This is Starship at the ISS.

>>12518563
Yes, it's simply a result of the scaling up of the system.

The Xuntian telescope will fly independently, but will dock to the station for maintenance.
It has a 2.4m mirror and will be similar to NASA's Nancy Grace Roman (which might get cancelled)

>>12518630
>>12518627
>>12518624
Let's be honest here, these moon missions were held together by duct tape.
Just seeing the trivial research that has been made on the ISS for 20 years proves we weren't ready to do anything serious on the moon.

>>12518653
>>12518638
Imagine the flex of parking a starship in orbit near the Chink tin can station, and mogging the fuck out of it

>>12518566
Hardware is expensive if you make it expensive. If you're iterating to make shit cheaper on purpose constantly, your prototypes end up quite cheap.

>>12518347
I tried drawing it to get a sense of scale.
>>12518562
Stop, please. My head hurts from trying to imagine how big that would be.
>>12518603
The reason why I chose a volume limit of 200,000m3 is because the largest storage tank in the world has that volume so I took it as the largest a tank can practically be. Your fineness ratio idea sounds good however. Might have to look into that.

>>12518347
>Iowas
Since when is this a unit of measurment?

>>12518653
>Starship wears the ISS as a hat and nudges into a graveyard orbit
top lel

>>12518662
Docking to the station for maintenance is pretty smart. I wish Hubble or any of the future western telescopes had this capability.

>>12518608
Then it would be the greatest upset ever because china is currently nowhere close to SpaceX in terms of technological capability and advancement.

>>12518300
Boeing just got done laying off 90% of the Old Guard. We'll see if the remaining millenials will be able to fix anything.

>>12518500
Dubs confirm

>>12518665
imagine refueling two starships within visual distance of the CSS

>ASSES TO ASSES
>FUNK TO FUNKY
>WE KNOW ELON MUSK'S A JUNKIE
>STRUNG OUT ON HEAVEN'S HIGH
>TWEET QUALITY AT AN ALL TIME LOW

>>12518653
Serious question - does this thing have a micrometeorite/debris protection?

Chinese Feitian spacesuit

>>12518677
>boeing
>millennials

>>12518670
1943

Scientifically speaking, why is the Starship concept a total hoax and New Shepherd the better choice by far?

>>12518685
>BAGL
the jews are getting more direct

>>12518673
That graveyard orbit had better have a periapsis of less than 100 km anon

>>12518684
OooOoOoOOO- look at the top of his head

>>12518695
America will never conquer space as long as our suits lack head windows.

>>12518675
Whatever Elon has, China has.
Just give SpaceX some time to develop good stuff, and China will copy instantaneously.

>>12518691
because as everyone knows, the slower you go the more likely you are to succeed, and SpaceX is moving incredibly fast, therefore they must be extremely unlikely to succeed.

>>12518681
>Not work safe image on work safe board.

>>12518669
why so many engines? doesn't mars have weak ass gravity?

>>12518704
China does not have FFSC, cope

>>12518670
she's a big boat

>>12518691
>NASA actually reprimanded Blue Origin for trying to charge 10x as much as SpaceX for the lunar lander program and stated a preference for "programs which have actually flown hardware"

>>12518709
Because Mars has 0.38 G which means you need 38 engines to lift something that would take 100 engines to lift on Earth.

>In 50 years top universities will have their own Orbiting Starship Lab
>Starship Longhorn and Starship Aggies are not allowed near each other following an "incident" that occurred in 2068

>>12518709
Because it is still incredibly heavy.

>>12518715
lmaooo body odor btfo

>>12518669
Mars is only 1/3g so can't tankage be proportionately larger?

>>12518715
Don’t worry Biden will fix that

>>12518669
>For when you want to take off from Mars and terraform it at the same time

>>12518710
>FFSC
Fungus Federation of Santa Cruz?

>>12518726
You think more than double the vertical column isn't proportionally larger?

>>12518734
If you don't know what that means you need to lurk moar

BIG JIM NEEDS TO PICK THE DYNETICS HLS BID NOW BEFORE LEAVING NASA.
DO NOT ALLOW BIDEN'S CHOICE TO SELECT THE NATIONAL TEAM LANDER.
DO IT JIM!
BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

>>12518734
French Freedom Secret Club?

>>12518669
That looks more feasible than SLS

>>12518734
Raptor is black magic donut steel

>>12518738
>If you don't know what that means you need to lurk moar
I'm a newfag and a tourist. I just came here to ask a question about ESA rockets and stayed cause it's comfy.

>>12518715
based

>>12518734
>Fart Fuck Shit Crap

>>12518748
Full Flow Staged Combustion, the highest performance rocket engine power cycle, and only SpaceX's Raptor engine uses it. It requires materials that can withstand exposure to fast flowing 500 degree oxygen at 800 times atmospheric pressure, which makes most materials literally burn up almost instantly.

>>12518734
Five Fingers Shaking Cock

>>12518753
looks so dorky with those teeth

>>12518734
Falcon Flying So Cool

>>12518768
>Full Flow Staged Combustion, the highest performance rocket engine power cycle, and only SpaceX's Raptor engine uses it.
Don't see a problem then, chinks can use spies, social engineering or do some hacking to obtain the needed schemes.

>>12518768
RD-270 also did, but URs never came to be nor was it used on N1s albeit planned to.

>>12518780
Did you miss 80atm of 500 degree oxygen? China doesn't have the materials science for that.

>>12518782
>F-1 sized before combustion instability problems were solved
>first FFSC engine fired
>N2O4 + UDMH
The engineers who made and tested this must've been fearless.

>>12518768
They probably have the blueprints already.

>>12518718
>The LSU Starship is known for being a retched concentration of both alcohol and marijuana. Gambling is rampant aboard the craft, yet some of the greatest scientific discoveries of the 21st centrist have been made with the help of these college students. Visitors aboard the craft also note the pleasant experience in working with Mike, the robotic tiger built by boston dynamics who helps with station keeping.

>>12518796
They knew their stuff when it came to launcher engines (but it's fun because they didn't and still don't when it comes to reliable jet engines for some reason).

>>12518780
I think they still have a ways to go. They could feasibly catch up, but the country seems to be incapable of making new novel technologies unless it's for subjugating their people.

>>12518780
Don't you think that if some rando on 4ch*n knows what it's about, them chinese don't already have the engine's composition blueprints and whatnot, adding to that the probable thousands of prototypes already assembled in record time?
>muh originality
>hurr durr the chinese copy all our good ideas
Face it amerifag, the w*st is bound to fall, soon, you'll have to embrace your squint-eyed, bug-eating, cat-skinning overlords, or meet your demise whilst working on the assembly line of said components amongst those who rebel and question the almighty CCP

>>12518826
shoo shoo MSS

>>12518826
动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 肅清 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 活摘器官 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Winnie the Pooh 劉曉波动态网自由门

>>12518256
I thinking New Shepherd ends up cheaper than SLS and that is good enough to get government contracts.

>>12518795
>Did you miss 80atm of 500 degree oxygen? China doesn't have the materials science for that.
Never underestimate your enemy, anon.

>>12518826
Taiwan #1

>>12518290
I love NASA and think they do lots of extremely important work, I also think they can't be trusted with rocket procurement anymore.
Instead of NASA developing rockets they need to focus on payloads and buy whatever the rocket manufacturers put out.

>>12518826
>Don't you think that if some rando on 4ch*n knows what it's about, them chinese don't already have the engine's composition blueprints and whatnot, adding to that the probable thousands of prototypes already assembled in record time?
Very likely.

>>12518835
McDonald's Square Massacre

>>12518682
Thats aluminum. Starship is made out of stainless steel.

>>12518879
>Thats aluminum. Starship is made out of stainless steel.
I'm asking about the windows.

>>12518715
source?

>>12518884
transparent steel

>>12518718
>Orbiting Starship Lab
Why would you expend a starship for a space station when you could make a space station with 10x as much volume as a starship for much cheaper?

>>12518748
Of course the ESA newfag shills for china
>>12518780
Literal coping

I just realized now that SpaceX flies from the same pad that Cassini launched from

>>12518884
Some form of transparent metal

>>12518414
Hopefully in a Hunter-gatherer state, with such hubristic bullshit completely forgotten. Read “Industrial Society and it’s Future”

>>12518906
Why are you on /sfg/?

>>12518879
>>12518903
Even if starship is made of steel and not aluminum, it's not like its skin is 3cm thick stainless steel. If I recall correctly it is only a couple mm.

>>12518903
>>12518884
>>12518879
We can already make glass way stronger than aluminum.

>>12518906
why are you on the computer, don't you have berries to forage?

>>12518911
Rockets and other planets are pretty cool. I occupy part of my time with such surrogate interests in lieu of the raw hunter-gatherer lifestyle robbed from me by happenstance placing me here rather than then.

The problem with modern technology is that it’s impossible to say “that’s enough” and stop where you are, not at any substantial scale and not for any substantial length of time. Technology will keep “advancing” towards something horrifying even if very few people actually want what is ahead.

>>12518928
>We can already make glass way stronger than aluminum.
Okay, but what if the shit hits the fan? There are bigger rocks.
The openwork construction of these windows makes me worry.
On the ISS there are huge seals to cover windows when no one is sitting in the observatory.

>>12518942
>t. luddite

>>12518929
I killed two squirrels today and am content with that. I’ll run later.

>>12518949
>t. guy who thinks Brave New World, Terminator, and the Matrix sound cool

>>12518928
strength is not toughness

>>12518950
>he doesn't sit still on the ice next to a breathing hole to hook and drag up seals to kill and eat raw
yeesh

>>12518958
That’d be pretty cool, but I think I prefer the more southerly climates where mankind evolved. Kind of curious what the rationale was of the first people who decided to go live in frozen wastelands.

>>12518739
>My understanding is that the National Team has been told, essentially, to never again submit a ludicrously high bid in comparison to its HLS competitors.

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1341114067126239233

Would you idiots please stop giving attention to the edgy teenage techno-primitivist?

>>12518942
>The problem with modern technology is that it’s impossible to say “that’s enough” and stop where you are, not at any substantial scale and not for any substantial length of time
Physics eventually has a say. We're already reaching the limits on silicon transistor density. The way to shape the future of technology is to build it yourself, not to pretend you can make it stop.

>>12518971
>GET THAT WEAKSHIT OUT OF HERE

>>12518950
Nice

>>12518965
They would've already lived in the far north just south of the actual arctic for thousands of years. The pressure to expand away from more densely populated areas has existed forever.

>>12518681
>>TWEET QUALITY AT AN ALL TIME LOW

>>12518715
and a preference for contractors willing to self fund in lieu of NASA gibs (straight from Big Jim)

>>12518980
>Physics eventually has a say. We're already reaching the limits on silicon transistor density.

We shall see within this century, most likely. If we’re lucky, biotechnology will stagnate before it enables freakish Resident Evil shit, and computer technology will stagnate before it enables Strong AI and creepy cyborgs.

> The way to shape the future of technology is to build it yourself, not to pretend you can make it stop.

I don’t think it can be stopped; I think it will advance and encroach onto human life until everything is destroyed and remolded to suit the needs of the system. You can see it sometimes here; those who love the idea of “space habitats” often advocate for destroying all the planets so they can be made into metal cans to fit more people.

With all the shit that was broken on Hubble (and purposefully gimped by spooks), what are the chances JWST deploys flawlessly?

>>12518682
ISS has thin aluminium plates spaced from the hull in some vital areas, Starship probably won't have any as I can't think of a rocket that has.

W... what is a rocket engine? It's just like a big gas stove, right? Why is it so expensive.

>>12519020
It works basically in the same way that a balloon flies around after you open up its asshole thingy, only the gas comes from combustion

>>12518693
What does this mean?
>>12518733
Terraform it into what? Mercury?

>>12519020
It's more like a jet engine had a baby with a fire truck water pump.

>>12518685
Look at the sad kid on the left lol

>>12519020
Most are a small fire turning a turbine that drives giant pumps that send fuel to the big fire.
What makes them expensive is the hotter they burn the more efficient they are but the harder it is to stop them melting.
Where efficiency isn't as important like a rocket car they can be made much cheaper and loss efficiency because the rocket equation doesn't matter.

>>12519034
he's too popular at last night's party. everybody took a turn on his ass. miracle he can even walk.

>>12519004
What, after it explodes on the pad?

>>12519054
yeah, what drives rocket upwards is hot gas molecules pounding on the bottom of the rocket (and bouncing off downwards). that is brutal.

>>12519086

If jet engines require oxygen to work, would attaching an oxygen tank to a jet engine allow it to work in space?

>>12519096
it defeats the purpose of the complex design that is a cope for the normal air.

>>12519096
Theoretically yes but rocket engines would be much more efficient

Integrated Powerhead
Demonstration (IPD)

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a430218.pdf

Anyone else waiting for the cgi animation of Long March 8 landing? With the actual failure still visible.

>>12519110
They aren’t going to try to land it until 2023

>>12519096
Turbines don't produce nearly as much thrust as rockets of a similar size.

>>12518547
ISS crew waving at you & laughing

>>12519107
>Build this thing
>Never make the whole engine
Why? Also NASA has a habit of designing and testing an engine but suddenly cancelling it.
>RL10 CECE
>J-2X
>TR106
>RS 84
>IPP, I guess

>>12519112
Dammit I hope they livestream it

They've got the cherry picker by snine and are shining a bunch of lights

>>12518818
>I'm bad at business
>Don't learn the language of the people who beat me at business

>>12519144
???

>French Guiana Soyuz launch tomorrow

>>12519139
Not a chance. Until it works. The failures won't even be acknowledged as landing attempts

>>12519112
oh, like how they were gonna do a lunar sample return by 2024? stop believing china's public timelines, it's obviously publicized to keep america from feeling any urgency

Will buzz aldrin live to see the maiden flight of SLS?

>>12519193
No

>>12519096
That's basically the SABER engine with the main difference being they wanted to get atmospheric oxygen into a rocket.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SABRE_(rocket_engine)

>>12519182
Honestly man assuming they start EDL tests in 2021 a landing by 2022 is likely simply because they’re probably gonna fail to land the first one or two.

Also I hope this lights a fire under Blue Origin’s ass. So far the only partially reusable rocket that isn’t 3 feet wide is the Falcon 9 (and Heavy, too).

>>12519193
I don't think I will

>>12518537
Not really no.

>>12519182
Dude the chinks have already done lunar sample return.

>>12519193
I want him to at least see the maiden flight of Starship.

>>12519020
>grab a garden hose
>the water pressure is pushing the hose slightly
>now imagine it was fuel coming out of the hose
>and you ignite it

>>12519261

>>12518272
How did SN8 fail? I want to hear you out

>>12519289
Loss of aerodynamic control, it was embarrassing

>>12519096
How the hell is jet propulsion supposed to work without air?

>>12519271
Buzz had the ultimate redemption arc with his opinion of SpaceX.

>>12519289
loss of pressure to the engine. This was probably caused by fluid sloshing around. I druhnk as fuck so I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but given what we know it's not unreasonable to expect SN9 to fail.

>>12519291
>exhaust goes engine rich due to fuel starvation
>loss of aerodynamic control
Confirmed brainlet baiter.

>>12519296
You just gave a good reason for why it will work you drunken bastard! If it’s just a problem with a valve or software for the valve they can fix it and fly SN9

>>12519296
SN9 will probably fail too but I’m positive they’ll stick the landing with one of the vehicles being made today

>>12519300
Literally how am I wrong. Engines start burning engine rich, aerodynamic control is lost.

>>12519304
It was using vectored thrust control at that point in the flight, the aerodynamic dive worked perfectly.

>>12519304
Control wasn’t an issue it failed because it lacked the thrust to land. She got close though, as impact was at 30 m/s

Why don't they just cushion the landing pad for SN9?

>>12519289
It looked really cool though. Explosion sell the movie.

>>12519309
why not land it on water?

>>12519303
I think they’ll stick the landing but the landing legs will fail and it will tip over and explode.

>>12519304
>aerodynamic control is lost
Control was pretty clearly maintained all the way to impact. It landed upright before exploding.

>>12519305
>>12519308
>>12519373
And what happened after loss of thrust?

>>12519376
Loss of control, nothing to do with "aerodynamics" as you say.

>>12519376
It impacted too quickly to survive the landing. Control over the vehicle’s orientation was not lost at any point in the flight.

>>12519381
Loss of control? Oh. Hmm seems weird to me that starship had aerodynamic stability all the way through the landing burn only to lose the engines and fall down through the... gah, dare I say... AIR

>>12519144
>>12519161
also the tank farm is venting for some reason?

They're spending a lot of time at the nose. I'd guess that they're leak searching

>>12518290
The hate is misguided. It's not NASA itself, it's Congress who's responsible for SLS

>>12519067
Seek help

What if Starship used a massive net to land?
Bellyflopping directly into a crash net like Spacex does with fairing recovery.

Renaming Phobos and Deimos to Phoebe and Dennis should rekindle public interest in space flight imho, especially in Mars exploration.

>>12519435
How will that help them though? It’s better to lose a vehicle and learn from it than baby it’s way back to another launch. Starship is gonna take a beating when landing on Mars before (or if) they eventually get to building nice landing pads there. Also it’s going to have to take off from that surface too, which is why elon doesn’t want a flame trench and prefers to just armor the bottom

>>12518796
It was Glushko after all.

>>12519295
If only Armstrong could have lived to change his opinion.

I think the whole nasa needs to focus on climate meme is a good thing.
Cancel SLS, spend that money on something more useful like geo engineering or carbon capture. Let SpaceX build the rockets.

>>12519508
More satellites to study the atmosphere would be cool

>t. Meteorologist

>>12519435
Because that won't work on the moon and mars

>>12518566
>most software projects fail.
Take the agile pill bro.

>>12519435
Ah yes, an aircraft carrier sized baseball glove.

>>12518780

If it is one thing the Chinese suck at copying, it is material science. One of the few fields where having a sample of something doesn't mean you can replicate it. You basically have to know the process on how to make it, not just the composition.

>>12519557
Starship is made of some spooky new alloy that was only invented recently. The tooling to build it also was invented like 5 years ago shits insane

Why dont we just make rockets out of carbon nanotubes? Michio Kaku told me everything will be made out of the stuff

>>12519557
America isn’t much better at it. We’ve never managed to replicate the slim amount of material recovered from UFOs, at least not publicly

>>12519575
Don’t do this...don’t derail the thread boyo

>>12519571
Turns out they’re basically as carcinogenic as asbestos. Also, the whole “not produceable cheaply at scale” issue really puts a damper on things.

>>12519575
Sorry Rogan, Bob Lazar has been debunked

Do any of you have that infographic that shows the current state of all Starship SN prototypes?

>>12518591
CHING CHONG BING BONG

Uhhh why would they do an ambient pressure test? NSF swore to me they would only do 1 cryo then 1 static fire

>>12519599
>DEBOOOOONKED

The US military got metamaterials from the same people who released the UFO videos originally last year. Story went quiet so god knows what happened with that
Not like the government tells us much anyway

>>12518670
are you some sort of homosexual? post steel kino.

>>12519626
Actually no, that never happened. I work on black projects for the US Disclosure Department. We have no materials, but we do have communications

>>12518748
the eternal (((ESA)))...

>>12518796
how the fuck did the soviets have such a lead in high temperature metallurgy black magic, to the point where they haven't really been surpassed to this date? Same thing with jet engines, chinks still can't master those. Is it trial and error? What's so special about soviet research bureaus?

Viasat will put an end to this Starlink nonsense one way or another

>>12519678
>euro conglomerate petitioning a US federal agency to audit an American company with increasing support from the DOD
I’m sure that’ll work out just fine for them.

>>12519714
>>12519678
arent they launching on falcon heavy next year? lol what is going through their mind

>>12518971
Working this out.

>>12519732
They’ll switch to Ariane 5 no problem honestly. I think they’re scared

NASA is going to slow down through the Biden administration. SpaceX will keep speeding up. But will anyone else speed up too? Rocket Lab? Maybe Japan will continue to throw gobs of money at space like they did with Artemis.

Falcon Heavy is a cool rocket but it is super niche. Falcon heavy with 3 cores reusable can put 8 tons into a GTO for $90 million. Falcon 9 expendable can put 8.3 tons into a GTO for $60 million. See the discrepancy? It’s not wonder that the Heavy is a commercial dead end because it’s 50% more expensive than its smaller sibling while putting the same mass onto a GTO.

Government missions no doubt can exploit this and the larger and more expensive versions, but Falcon Heavy is a commercial blunder not by anyone’s fault but by simple math. Still love it though.

>>12519791
Honestly NASA being surpassed by SpaceX is a great fear for many politicians. I’m confident that the HLS selection will have Starship because everyone knows that SpaceX is going with or without NASA’s help, and they don’t want to look like fools>>12519791

>>12519653
different priorities
in USA, metallurgists are on the level of ketchup manufacturer technicians who just mix shit by the cookbook
in USSR, metalurgy was considered a prestigious science just as complex as semiconductors, if not more

I'm exaggerating of course a bit, but heavy industry was prioritized over other industry and that also means more funds and brainpower for material research in that sector

>>12518272
I hate Musk and believe the Starship will not reach a 10% of its promise, but SpaceX in itself did manage reusable first stage reducing significantly the cost.
I give the engineers that. Musk should just shut the fuck up and use his social media to promote the engineers who actually did the job (They would easily be known as equal to Von Braun)

>>12518290
It's an easy target and represent nicely what is wrong with current national space agency.
Without a drive it's treated as just dump cost by the Government and plenty of regulation keep them from making anything new if it cost money.

>>12518466
>got caught trying to spread his narrative

>>12518498
Almost this >>12518533 except he isn't actually a good manager. He is just ridiculously lucky and a meme.
He made his fortune by betting on Paypal,
TESLA didn't make a profit for years, they literally removed him from the decision board,
With SpaceX he almost went bankrupt until the US desperate for a new launch vehicle gave him billion in contract and subsidies.
But since TESLA and SpaceX are now very well known as brands, the investors rushed on them hoping for those to become the new BIG TECH in their domain. Making their stock value literally skyrocket.

>>12518851
>they need to focus on payloads
no, that will just shift from grossly overpriced rockets to grossly overpriced payloads
they need to just set up goals and hand out grants to promising ideas and start-ups, not make make their own probes
have private industry build entire fleets of standardized, mass produced rovers, probes, telescopes, hab modules, etc.

>>12519872
Fuck off pinko

>>12518618
It's not about documentation - the government did not want spaceflight. NASA fought tooth and nail for the shipwreck that was the shuttle and the few probes ever odd decade. The government wanted it ALL gone. Now they don't because they found use for it, namely pocketing tax money through meme with dubious relation to spaceflight.

>>12519791
If Japan will see that NASA goes nowhere, they can just slap a crew module on HTV.

>>12518347
Largest possible will be when your engines can't lift it because there's no more room to fit engines. Make sure to add some basic structural reinforcement because the tanks can't hang in vacuum.

>>12519648
>Why would you reuse rockets? It's like reusing condoms! Ha,ha,ha!

>>12519804
It is more niche than that. It shares the exact same fairing as F9, so you can't put anything big inside.

>>12519193
He will live a lot longer on Mars, so probably yes.

why both americans and soviets felt that super heavy rocket was requirement for moon mission? soviet moon program even callapsed when n1 failed. couldnt they use two smaller rockets to launch two parts of vehicle and dock them on LEO? one rocket carrier TLI booster, other rocket carries command moduole/lander stack. its not like docking was unheard of.

>>12519811
Reminder that SpaceX is alive today because it got a big contract from NASA.
Reminder that Elon was crying when he got that phone call.
See, /sfg/? In the end space is a waste of money that is only viable by stealing from people's pockets via taxes.

>>12519678
>meanwhile
>"Europe Wants Its Own Alternative To Elon Musk's Starlink"

I assume they are considering environmentally friendly and invisible in all wavelengths sats. Anything else is literally a holocaust.

>>12520034
Docking was difficult at the time. Single launch configuration was the preferred method. The initial american design also didn't use separate lander (aka docking involved) but rather landing the entire thing, and as a leftover the apollo CSM was actually (as far as propulsion goes) capable of lifting off from the lunar surface. It was scrapped because they were in a hurry and needed even bigger rocket to pull it off. The low lunar orbit docking was considered quite suicidal.

>>12520040
Absolutely this you should be grateful for anything and turn blind eye to all utter and complete governmental waste no matter how overwhelming or destructive it is! Unless told otherwise by the authorities, citizen.

>>12520050
yeah, but its just strange that soviets didnt even tried to make it work with two smaller rockets since n1 was kill. even if docking on LEO was hart, it was not impossible. why did they decided to scrap whole program if all they needed was just add another docking operation to mission?

>>12520040
goverment contracts maybe jumpstarted spacex, but im pretty sure thatw ith theyr low price of launches, they would do perfectly fine without goverment contracts now.

>>12519096
You can technically move around in space with a BB gun. Doesn't mean its a good idea to do so.

>>12519193
can you imagine anyone more based than buzz?
>walks on the moon
> writes book about orbital maneyvers all by himself
>sucker punches moon hoax retard in age of 60yo or something
>invents concept of moon cycler
>looks like guy from hide the pain meme

>>12518669
you have to understand that not all engines is built the same, some of them will fail and your creation will fall back to earth.

>>12520008
It is about documentation. The Apollo rocket and space modules of the time weren't done on computers, they were done by hand. All of the data, notes, designs and such were hand written on paper. Even the machinists who made the damn parts kept hand written notes on tweaks and changes.
Once computers started coming on the scene, too many autistic engineers refused to let their work get digitized for fear of it being stolen. Now a majority of it is lost. All those hand-written documents rotted away. We have some parts left, but a majority was dumped into the ocean during flight, so its no good either.
There hasn't been a demand since that point, so none of the big companies were willing to put out the R&D to get it done again.

>>12520153
>too many autistic engineers refused to let their work get digitized for fear of it being stolen.
are you making this up?

>>12520061
They wasted about 5 years on the N1 and UR700 when they could of been developing Salyut/Soyuz. By the time they had the procedures developed which would of allowed earth orbit rendezvous it was the late 70s and no one cared about the moon any more.
They would of tried in the late 90s with Energia/Zenit though

>>12519435
Fairings can use a parachute to slow down and gently touch down into a net (that is larger than a football field).
Starship would need a HUGE parachute and HUGE net to catch it, which would be an engineering nightmare.
Not to mention it needs to land upright due to the way forces act on the body. Unless it landed perfectly flat on its side, you risk damage.

daddy musk is calling viasat out on their bullshit LMAO

>>12520174
holy shit

>>12519804
>Falcon 9 expendable can put 8.3 tons into a GTO for $60 million.
>$60 milllion
Not arguing FH is a niche rocket, but $60m for a F9 launch - especially expendable - is false.
Unless you have a source to back that up, I'll have to say you're factually wrong.

>>12520162
No. I'm a Gen-X mechatronics engineer. The boomers are insane over "muh intellectual property"
Not all of them were scared of it being stolen, some had job insecurities and were scared they would get replaced if they gave up their designs. Some simply lost their papers, others didn't like computers.

>>12520194
now i understand day of pillow memes. these motherfuckers wanted to literally take theyr accomplishments to grave with them.

>>12518398
Vega is an Italian ICBM made for French Navy with ESA decal and an extra upper stage
Ariane 5 is basically mini SLS that isn't completely terrible, although still rather expensive
Ariane 6 is attempt at making it cheaper by half and would have been somewhat competitive with Falcon 9 (if only for geostationary sats) had they made it 5 years ago

As for the future, they realized Ariane 6 is really behind the curve and won't cut it
So they are attempting to rush methalox Falcon 9 knock-off (Themis) and fix how bloated and inefficient their organization is to remain at least somewhat competitive
I don't think they will catch up any time soon, but at least they trying

>>12520153
That's tinfoil. The surrounding industry that made it possible and the hands on experience is gone as such it cannot be done even with all the blueprints available. A small example that troubled Orion of all things - Apollo's heat shield used some form of asbestos made in England, attempts to imitate the heatshield failed because nobody makes the stuff and it's also banned.

>>12520181
>>12519804
I do not believe spacex even offers expendable F9 commercially anymore

>>12520217
>So they are attempting to rush methalox Falcon 9 knock-off (Themis) and fix how bloated and inefficient their organization is to remain at least somewhat competitive
Nice, I like knock-offs.
>I don't think they will catch up any time soon, but at least they trying
I believe the project is more about "independent access to space" rather than trying to compete with SpaceX.
It's better to have your own car rather than rented bus.

>>12520280
>"independent access to space"
Already got that with ariane 5. If that's the argument they use... oh boy.

>>12519732
yeah. Big brain move

>>12520300
I've read somewhere EU told Arianespace something along the lines "either get to cost down or go broke, we can buy from Americans"

>>12520174
>direct competitor crawling to the FCC to bail their useless ass out
what a joke. Just fucking pitiful. Elon should force them to ride on a more expensive rocket.

>>12518290

>be rocket engineer

Work for national agency
>paid to study hypothetical manned flag planting mission
>only allowed to reuse and upgrade 80yrs oldspace design
>no unproven newspace technology allowed to be tested
>have to wear cap made of red tape
>every few years your budget and design goal reset
>do mission-critical R&D side-project that will never be used
>people call you a tax-thief with a cushy-job

Work for private company
>paid to build a mars-rocket right now is it done yet?
>free hands to try any imaginable new engine and concept
>no uncool technology allowed to be tested
>green paper fall from the sky
>subsidies money keep coming no matter how much explode
>get all mission-critical R&D for free from national agency
>people glorify the CEO who hired you to make gravity his bitch

>>12520339
literal virgin vs chad

>>12519678
>>12520174
Why can't they just compete normally with Starlink?

>>12520300
Ariane 5 is a heavy launcher, it was only competitive if you launched big GEO satellites or multiple at once.
With SpaceX crashing the market and offering service for disposable LEO satellites they do need to adapt or die.
That's not counting that Ariane 5 ended up never doing manned flight even if it was originality meant to.

>>12520347
california tactics.

>>12520346
>>12520339
yes you're supposed to post this pic too

>>12520339
why do you keep posting this autistic shit in EVERY SINGLE FUCKING sfg thread

Imagine being an elonmeme in the coming year of Our Lord 2021. Upcoming Starship developments will BTFO them harder than ever, I wonder where goalposts will ends up.

>>12520371
>I wonder where goalposts will ends up.
up ur arse

>>12520355
> Creator was predicted by Von Braun himself
Is this really just coincidence? Or ...

>>12520354
>Carlsbad, California
When are we going to get an Elonsbad there?

>>12520374
just a character name that match

>ywn be advanced space-faring android, exporing extraterrestrial life

>>12520374
If I recall correctly, von Braun used the word "elon" to refer to a ruler on Mars because it stands for something important in another language (a search showed Hebrew for "judge") and Elon's dad likely drew from the same inspiration

>>12520394
guys?

>>12520386
It seems pretty rare tho

>>12520400
nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

>>12520366
Ceterum autem censeo SLS esse delendam
t. Cato

>>12520400
((Elon)) Musk

>>12519020
The biggest challenge is creating enough fuel and oxidizer pressure to squirt it into a very high-pressure combustion chamber. Estronaut has the best video explaining it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbH1ZDImaI8

>>12520071
launching what, anon? The only customer that regularly puts stuff up there is the gubmint.

>>12520411
Delenda est.

>>12520400
Elon is his first name, dumbfaggot.

>>12520096
the absolute chad

>>12520400
>/Pol/tards loosing their collective shits
this is a blessed timeline after all

>>12520416
>>12520408
>>12520400
>>12520537
its his first name retards

>>12520268
Its not tinfoil, its true, they've even done documentaries on it. Real documentaries, not History Channel "aLiEnS" documentary.
>A small example that troubled Orion of all things
Government contractors not being able to reproduce stuff really comes down to simply being inept.

>>12520563
>implying that would stop them

>>12520499
They only account for about half of the launches, and thats heavily supported by ISS resupply missions. Internal missions for Starlink are gaining momentum.
Starlink counts because although they don't make money from launches directly, they will be getting buckets of cash from subscriptions.

about starship and going to mars. personally, i belive that after few initials missions, crewed starships will stop going to mars. instead, starship it will be used to assemble some kind of mothership in orbit. that mothership will have artificial spin gravity, much better radiation shielding, possibly nuclear drive to make trip shorter. mothership would laso be able to go into martian orbit instead of slamming into atmosphere like starship. once there, mothership would dock with reusable mars surface-orbit lander/shuttle.
i do not have any proof that it will happen, but it just seem logical.

>>12519678

>>12520570
Maybe some retarded ones but a lot of anglos have names based off biblical jewish names and there is a christian identity presence on /pol/ as well

>>12520592
i very much doubt that'll happen

>>12519439
Post of the thread here.

Black holes are trannies because they dilate time

>Viasat’s argument for an environmental review goes beyond orbital debris. It claims that both the launch and reentry of Starlink satellites poses environmental hazards, from the production of ozone-destroying chemicals by launch vehicles to chemicals released in the atmosphere when satellites burn up on reentry and debris that reaches the ground.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA MORE LIKE VIVAJEW

>>12520636
So why do they make space junk if they think it hurts the environment? Fucking retards

>>12520592
Starship can't orbit Mars without landing on Mars first. Starship is going to punch it straight there with all of the fuel in its main tanks to minimize travel time and use aerobraking exclusively to stop. The only fuel it has left after it makes its burn to escape Earth is in the header tanks, and that's reserved completely for the flip and landing burn in the final few seconds.

>>12520655
>Starship can't orbit Mars without landing on Mars first.
why not? can't it aerobrake trough the atmosphere "just enough" to get into orbit?

>>12520655
>Starship can't orbit Mars without landing on Mars first

Sure it can just aerobrake

>>12520592
yes, imagine how cool that would be. if you use orbital assembly and mine materials off asteroids, you could easily have a mothership for which the starships are the landers

>>12520592
Imagine a station in a Earth-Mars cycler orbit. Cool shit.

>>12520660
>>12520662
Even if you aerobrake only to the extent that you still exit the atmosphere in a captured orbit of Mars the perigee of your orbit will still be inside the atmosphere and thus will obviously result in you coming back into the atmosphere potentially multiple times with an ever shrinking orbit. Of course you could keep reserve fuel in the main tanks to fix that, but you would cut into your travel time. It's not impossible outright, it's just that there's no point in doing it. Especially not a mothership anything like that, at least not anytime in the initial colonization of Mars. At the time that it would become more effective to build an Earth/Mars cycler it wouldn't need to be built with Starships launched from Earth. And building an actual mothership that propels itself to any noteworthy degree would be much better done early and in the Earth/Moon system.

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.6.2.20201223a/full/
>The Department of Energy, in collaboration with NASA, plans to solicit proposals from industry in January for designs of surface power reactors. Three contracts valued at around $5 million each are expected to be awarded, says Anthony Calomino, nuclear systems portfolio manager in NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate. A solicitation for nuclear thermal propulsion system designs will follow in a month or so, he adds, for which another three $5 million contracts are likely to be issued. The design efforts will span 12 months.

Would the oil rigs of Nigeria make a great place to build a spaceport for something like Starship?
>Very close to the equator, reducing fuel needed to make it into orbit.
>Exporter of natural gas, which would give any methalox rocket a steady supply of methane
>Oil rig platforms could be converted and expanded to allow for offshore landing, reducing noise and minimising damage from a hard landing.
Any thing that would negate what seems like a good place to launch large rockets from?

>>12520747
It's a shithole

>>12518290
Because SpaceX has shown that what was the prior state of the art was horrible.Things that were taken as necessary and impossible to avoid "space is hard" turned out to be bullshit and it is clear as day that 50 years and hundreds of billions were lost on NASA incompetent management

when will sn9 hop?

>>12520809
sometime nxt year

>>12518500
>the greatest modern spaceflight company
BO is not a spaceflight company, they launch sounding rockets

>>12518685
>This is the average BO employee

>>12520763
Well of course you have to consider that. But besides that, anything else?

>>12520852
i mean, she's not wrong

>>12520862
>she

Arianespace stream soon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p74FqD_HlOE

>>12519386
I think you might be seriously mentally deficient.
Aerodynamic control is control non-combustion controlled control via flaps, wings or canards.
The loss of control on starship was due to loss in thrust, hence loss of gimbal control

>>12520872
Another glowniggering payload.
You now how this ends, anons (it has happened before, a number of times)

>>12520885
Never happened

>>12520852
>tranny doesn't even get suicide right
>>12520872
what are they launching?

Jesus this camera is some crusty shit

>>12520896
Holy shit this image

>>12520896
im for transexual rights and every kind of rights
i think facist should be hanged by the balls

but cancel culture is cancer, and labelling everything that has a shadow as "racist" is actually extremely counter productive to fight off racism. i wish people did an effort to tell things apart

Is my sense of scale way off? This Soyuz looks so small compared to the launch complex. Are those towers 1000' tall or something?

>>12520914
>im for every kind of rights
>facist should be hanged by the balls
DEGENERATES LIKE YOU BELONG ON A CROSS

>>12520609
Imagine how funny it would be if this is what Musk replied with

>>12520918

They need to be tall because they are supposed to catch stray lightning, preventing the rocket being hit. Also, the Soyuz isnt that big of a rocket at least, not anymore (It was the biggest when it was introduced).

>>12520926
You can almost taste taste his seething, along with the other SpaceX stans in this thread

>>12520763
Nigeria is based read their Internet forums sometimes
They’re maniacs

>>12520862
That’s obviously a male, anon, who pretends to be female because they have autogynophilia.

>>12520914
>I’m an insane degenerate who thinks cutting your dick off and pretending to be a girl is okay

>>12520918

>>12519386
Don't strain yourself reaching.

>>12520938
>>12520865
bigot

>>12520914
Welcome to the center my dude, make sure to stop by the grill for burgers and fries

>>12520959
>Centrists think gross Frankenstein surgeries and pretending you’re a woman when you’re a male are okay

Figures

>>12520951
You must be joking. If not, maybe Reddit is more your speed.

>>12520963
They make up like 1% of 1% of the population. How about we just ignore them like the irrelevant small group they are? It's not like they really have any voting power. Why even talk about them, or focus on them at all?

Guys let's please talk about china's private space companies, they're doing tons of VTVL flights and look like they're the only one's taking it seriously, thing is, I have no fucking clue about any of them.

That is a beautifull shot right there.

>>12521025
>china's private [] companies
lol

>>12521031
ofc, but tbf the aerospace industry is almost always enmeshed with the government.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p74FqD_HlOE
Ariane stream starting

>>12521006
Someday transhuman will make 99.99% of the population.
The rest will be retarded luddite we graciously keep alive in artificial reserve.

Why does arianespace have gay talkshows before every launch instead of just showing the rocket like everyone else

>>12521049
It's not bad, at least they stream their launches. It makes it more accessible I guess.

>>12520970
If anon told you to kill yourself, would you do it? Fascist

>>12521063
>If anon told you to kill yourself, would you do it?

No because I’m not a tranny

>remember the launch 2 minutes before launch
very nice

>>12521038
Transhumanism is a stand-in for religion for atheist nerds with weak, flabby bodies who don’t understand that “transhumanism” will just be a Google microchip in their brain that disables offensive thoughts

>>12520889
You are not allowed to know. The few other apes who do know are lying to you.

That was a nice Korolev cross, a good omen.

>>12520400
>Von Braun used a Jewish name to refer to the ruler of Mars
That’s sorta ironic.

>>12521076
based! such a nice launch