/sci/ - Science & Math

Just the other day. Some monkey, or ULA employee, said Falcon Heavy couldn't launch Gateway. Thus FalconHeavy couldn't launch people to the moon.

I would feel better if Project Kuiper was part of Blue Origin, not fucking Amazon. Imagine if Starlink was part of Tesla.

-Starlink revenue funds starship
-Kuiper revenue funds ????

Explanation: This gorgeous island universe lies about 85 million light-years distant in the southern constellation Fornax. Inhabited by young blue star clusters, the tightly wound spiral arms of NGC 1350 seem to join in a circle around the galaxy's large, bright nucleus, giving it the appearance of a cosmic eye. In fact, NGC 1350 is about 130,000 light-years across. That makes it as large or slightly larger than the Milky Way. For earth-based astronomers, NGC 1350 is seen on the outskirts of the Fornax cluster of galaxies, but its estimated distance suggests that it is not itself a cluster member. Of course, the bright spiky stars in the foreground of this telescopic field of view are members of our own spiral Milky Way galaxy.

>>12700492
The really funny part is that I believe PPE+HALO outweighs an Apollo CSM+LEM, meaning Falcon Heavy will have broken the Saturn V's record for largest payload delivered to TLI while SLS still can't static fire directly.

>>12700496
Kuiper will probably be used to enhance Amazon's retail side. It's not even part of AWS.
>Kuiper dishes on fulfillment centers innaboonies and branch offices, thus fueling Amazon's expansion
>Kuiper subscribers get free Prime membership encouraging them to buy more from Amazon
>Kuiper dishes on container ships so Amazon can micromanage their supply chain

>https://youtu.be/2rn-vMbFglI

>https://youtu.be/2rn-vMbFglI

>>12700485
Posted this in the earlier thread but Starship is inevitable. They will get the landing sorted out soon because we know they’ve fixed the header tank issue. Heat shield might be a pain but 1) Steel can survive high heats and 2) Starship PROONTING down in Boca Chica. Superheavy is almost done, ready to be pressure tested. Even if it fails they have another on under construction.

How will OldSpace cope?

>>12700642

Current build progress.

>>12700650
Starship is pretty as hell. I love that reflective blue it gets when falling.

>>12700653
Holy crap BN1 is almost done. Also SN11 looks like it’s nearly complete and SN15 just needs its tank to get stacked.

>>12700667
Overweight piece of shit...should go on a diet...plus the Aerospike never hit its performance goals...doomed from the start....fat

>>12700500
nice

>>12700485
How heavy is the stack? I remember old documents saying that the PPE was “7-9 tons.”

All the Mars terraforming ideas I've seen seem to assume that you'd pump the atmosphere full of CO2 to get to a cycle and high pressure as fast as possible. But what if instead of pressure you just focussed on the most effective Greenhouse Gasses? Sure the atmosphere would still be thin and probably a bit more toxic than before, but at least it'd be warm. CO2 isn't that strong a greenhouse gas so you could shave a lot of zeroes off the timescale of the project.

Poles would melt. Wind energy would increase, maybe rain would get going, making hydropower feasible and cleansing the soil of salt.
Or maybe I'm just a brainlet.

>>12700485
is the plan from terraformars manga a good alternative?, ( sending millions of cookroach and algae so they greenhouse gasmaxx the planet) or so i remember

>>12700653
What is the point of SN7.2? Will it be installed into a Starship later?

>>12700667
Looking at the maintenance needed for the RS25s, I don't want to imagine what the maintenance for a hydrogen aerospike would be like.

Guys rate my terraforming idea: so Phase I is habitats. We build pressurized habs and rely on space suits for EVA's initially. Phase II is just doing this until we get to Titan and do the same thing. Oh, and as for terraforming we don't worry about it because it is a fucking meme and apart from costing quadrillions of dollars it would take timescales beyond comprehension

>>12700713

It's a test tank, they deliberate test it to a limit to validate whether some design reasoning is correct. I may not be correct, but this one might be testing 3 millimeter stainless steel tank walls rather than 4mm.

>>12700705
>terraforming
kys

>>12700717
based

>>12700713
Testing thinner metal for pressure resilience

>>12700721
>>12700725
Interesting. Does this mean that if the testing is successful, Starship might become ~20-25% lighter?

>>12700722
>terraforming
>kys
why?

>>12700785
Yeah that's the plan. I believe they wouldn't make the entire thing thinner, but I know for sure Elon has interest in really shaving down the mass in the fuel tank sections. He doesn't even NEED to (which is good). It's just so that he can get that much more payload to Mars

>>12700791
Oh I should also add that he has mentioned REALLY shaving the mass down for deep space missions i.e. voyager-style missions. He hasn't said much about it, but methinks he means that he will get rid of the fins and the regular sealevel raptors, and instead make the entire upper stage a fuckhuge satellite bus and yeet that shit out. This would be cool

>>12700790
why not?

>>12700785
Without fuel and cargo yes

>>12700801
lots of reasons, catalysis makes fast, partial terraforming possible, for instance

The musk man is getting even richer (on paper)

>>12700502
Falcon Heavy is merely delivering PPE+HALO to LEO+a small number

A Soyuz AND a Cygnus going up to the ISS this week? Should be fun

>>12700485
>PPE+HALO
the modules on the Gateway look kinda narrow, how small are they compared to the western modules on the ISS?

>>12700923
the same size, roughly

>>12700923
I want to put ppe in halo

>>12700715
I do.

>>12700653
Meh, I prefer the old format.

Would this work?

>>12700653
So SN15 will have all the "upgrades" Elon talked about? Thinner sheets, what else?

I thought Perserverance was landing this weekend, but I was misled.

>>12700977
no

>>12700991
Why not?

>>12700992
you're accelerating at 10g in one direction (how? basically impossible to get that much T/W ratio and also a decent mass fraction)
there is no way to not feel the acceleration, it's impossible

>>12700997
I'm just talking about if we get meme drives. At that point the biggest limiter will be the speed of human missions.
>there is no way to not feel the acceleration, it's impossible
How? Could you not just spin fast enough and at the right angle to make them even out?

>>12700977

Is this part the one that spins either way? If so, it could be feasible but you'd need to have materials strong enough to stand up these forces for prolonged periods of time.

>>12701009
Yes, that's the center ring that has a motor to spin it up. The grey angled bits are the spokes that hold the habitation segments, which are the green boxes.

>>12700640
I want to live there and watch at all those starship explosions from my living room.

>>12701005
no, you are always going to be pulled in one direction at 10g
if you spin, you're just adding more force perpendicular to that, it's just vector addition
[math]f_{t}=\sqrt{f_{a}^{2}+f_{b}^{2}}[/math]

>>12700977
>>12701009
The angle of the arms doesn't mean shit, the direction of inertia is in the plane of the spin. So you would have 10g forward, and 9g perpendicular. They don't cancel each other out, you just the g force slightly off angle, still at more than 9 g.

>>12700977
The spin gravity here is at a right angle to the thrust gravity, so...

>Sqrt((10^2)+(9^2))=13.45 G

Congratulations anon, you have invented death

There's no need for 10g unless you are a fighter pilot, in which case you would be heavily augmented anyways.

>>12701038
>>12701043
Nevermind, I get it now.
I guess settling for 1g meme drives is fine.

Here is a handy reference picture. Gravity is still pulling down, and the centrifugal force is perpendicular. The result is still full g, but at an angle.

>>12701045
>>12701049
>bros if we spin a gravitron just right the force of gravity will cancel out perfectly and we can float
>we're geniuses, why does NASA waste so much time on parabolic airplanes or whatever, what a bunch of chumps

>>12701053
>posts the Cirno edit
aw yeah

>>12701049
You could orient spin gravity to cancel thrust gravity, but at the expense of them canceling on one half of the rotation and adding on the other half. It'd be like a big sine wave of 19 G to 1 G every revolution.

>>12700705
Nobody is in a rush to actually terraform the planet, in fact many on the board would rather not as covering half the planet on water seems like a waste.

When are we as a species gonna suck it up and build something that will last for the ages, long after we're gone? Habitats in 400x400 km windscraping LEO and little mooring stations in near-rectumlinear halo orbits suck and require constant stationkeeping. You know who wouldn't build that shit? The Aztecs or Egyptians or whatever. We need a couple of huge void cities out at the Earth-Moon L4 and L5 points instead of this piddly shit that needs constant stationkeeping to stay afloat.

>>12701101
orbital
ring
i
n
g

>>12701101
Building outside LEO not only incurs a payload penalty but also a massive radiation hazard. Not worth it. That being said a couple dozen kilometer higher wouldn't hurt.
The lunar gateway being retarded is kind of it's purpose though.

>>12701105
The radiation hazard is only in the Van Allen Belts, which are well inside geostationary altitude. I admit you couldn't have shit in L4/L5 by itself, but lots of people agree an L1 station would be useful. If you built one of those, then a station in L4 or L5 is only 300 meters per second away. That's not much

>>12701114
>I admit you couldn't have shit in L4/L5 by itself
Why not?

>>12701125
Like >>12701105 said, there's nothing really there and it's expensive as all hell to get to from the usual orbits that are useful and common. The main benefit like I said is that shit you place there doesn't go away. But how much of a benefit is that, really? I think an EML1 pit-stop city between the Earth and the Moon would make it far more appealing. If you're already stopping by there, then L4 or L5 are only 340 meters per second away. The L1 city is bound to have a fuel depot, so you're paying for 680 m/s of gas compared to 8,000 m/s if starting in low Earth orbit.

Also, check out this space habitat idea I had. Thermoregulation is accomplished through passive heat pipes with no moving parts, there aren't any airtight bearings to fuck up and kill everyone, the cylinder is squat and wide so no gyroscopic precession, and light field displays on the walls and ceiling make it look indistinguishable from a nice sunny or cloudy day on Earth (with the exception of the landscape curving up and disappearing 500 yards away.)

>>12700676
>>12700676
>>12700676
>>12700676

>>12701187
There is no rebuke for this. I hate Russia as much as the next guy but Soyuz is a god-tier oldspace LEO scooter. It gets the job done and that's it. Feels like something that would come in your happy meal or be seven bucks in the sporting goods section or something. Only downside is that the propellants start eating the tanks after nine months on-orbit

>>12701146
I admire your drawing skills, when I do something like this on paper it ends up poorly

but how does the thermoregulation work exactly?
I get that absorptive section will get warmer and radiative cooler
is that increase temperature -> increase pressure at one end, periodically creating wind throughout the sections?

>>12700640
I'm 99.9% sure that's Maria's old house
https://twitter.com/bocachicamaria1?lang=es

>>12701201
Thanks! And yeah, my idea was that you basically have a little weather system in each adjoined radiator/absorber pair. It could be water or alcohol or whatever, but it's at low pressure (below atmospheric) such that as the sunward absorber gets heated, the fluid boils and moves upwards to condense on the cooling radiator side opposite the absorber. Actually now that I think about it both ends can be identical, swapping roles as the disks rotate. The only problem I can think of is how to extract mechanical work from the flowing vapor using few or no moving parts. Turbines in those joining pipes are the obvious solution but I want the important parts to basically last forever. Maybe if the working fluid could be made magnetic or ferromagnetic or something...

Another problem I realized is that landing ships using wheel brakes to come to a rest in the rotating frame actually leech angular momentum from the station. A policy would need to be enacted that ships taking off would need to use motorized wheels to go back to inertial, thus putting the momentum back into the wheel.

>>12700653
Someone post the New Glenn chart.

>>12701217

that's basically how a fridge works AFAIK. i believe you could use a stirling engine to do useful work with the temperature difference. the real challenge with this design would be radiating the heat away; you lose heat by surface area so you don't want those curved surfaces as your radiators.

Would Crew Dragon on a Falcon Heavy have the delta V to get to the Gateway and back?

>>12701241
no

>>12701241
>>12701252
It could get there easily, the hard part would be getting back.
They would need to build something like the CSM to push the Dragon back.

>>12701237
I know. Weather cycles are a form of heat engine (T. mechanical engineer) but like I said the vapor already does work by moving across to the other reservoir. And nah, I think it's about perfect. A black outer surface is excellent at radiating heat as it faces away from the sun, and is excellent at absorbing it as it faces the sun. Ideally the motion of the vapor from one side to the other is tapped using as few moving parts as possible, and used to among other things power refrigeration pumps (also using as few moving parts as possible) that are on a natural feedback loop to keep the interior 22°C at all times.

If you use something like an Einstein refrigerator you can ditch moving parts or electricity entirely and just turn hot coolant vapor directly into refrigeration. The perfect design has no moving parts and will remain be habitable even if abandoned for thousands of years. Maybe those light field displays could use the seebeck effect to get their electricity... I know PV cells degrade, so solar panels are out.

>>12700640
> Disney remakes UP!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFrLsZP2rHY

>>12701053
>>12701063
Anime edits are fucking gay

>>12701384
this guy gets it

>>12701391
Frogs are even gayer.

>>12701423
Sure thing Alex

You up there, you faggots want to talk about space or nah?
SN11 got her nosecone now, that's pretty cool.

>>12701434
Sadly there isn't much to talk about right now, it's cool China and UAE both got mars orbit but it'll be awhile until they land. SpaceX is playing their cards close to their chest on SN10 and SN7.2 and SLS is still a running joke.
Has there been any word on Vulcan or are they still hoping BO isn't a front and actually will build the BE-4 one day?

Vulcan still doesn't really exist does it?

>>12701439
No idea about Vulcan, was she ever real?
I thought SN7.2 was done but there she is, resolutely still sitting there not being scrapped. I wonder if they're going to try to pop her again?

>>12701456
Just the fact Musk hasn't been celebrating on twitter makes me think SN7.2 didn't get the target pressure. My guess is they are going to fix the welds and try again like they did with SN7.1 the first time.

>>12700500
How many civilizations are in this photo?

>>12701476
Interesting thought, maybe 0, maybe millions.
It's crazy to think that we could have neighbours 150 ly away running active SETI and we wouldn't know yet.

>>12700705
You might be able to use gasses that are 1,000 or 10,000 times more efficient than CO2 (like Sulfur Hexaflouride) but they're 1,000,000 times more rare and expensive. Plus CO2 is just lying around and you'd have to manufacture or bring these weird gasses from Earth. It's far easier to use what's already available.

Vulcan pathfinder first stage now at the Cape. I'm just now realizing that the entire first stage and not just the engines are pathfinders, which is kind of disappointing.

>Vulcan has arrived
>New Glenn has arrived
Just how worried is SpaceX? inb4 not worried.

>>12701511
Took 'em long enough, now it's a real party.

>>12701511
They're not worried lol. Both are intermediate designs meant to compete with F9/FH, both are at least as far from flight ready as Starship (probably more) while being uncompetitive on price and performance.

>>12700485
GAY-TWAY!

>>12701511
ULA / Vulcan ownes enough senators to get just about every military launch and the CEO has openly said they only care about the government market.
New Glenn might compete with Falcon 9 for commercial launches but I honestly have doubts because BO has been very oldspace so far I doubt they will be anywhere near as cheap. Still I would like to be proven wrong.
If BFR / Starship works and is within 500% of the expected flight cost SpaceX are stilling pretty for the next decade as everyone tries to catch up.

>>12701511
>Vulcan
ULA kinda half-assed it, but it will still be a real competitor to the Falcon.
>New Glenn
It's a Falcon Heavy competitor, which is to say it's competing for an almost nonexistent market. NG is probably better in terms of rideshare, constellations, and maybe price overall though.

But basically >>12701519. Everyone scrambled to compete with the Falcons, meanwhile SpaceX was already working on making it obsolete. If Starship comes online within the next couple years as planned, Vulcan and NG will instantly be as obsolete as the Delta IV is today.

>>12701529
>BO: New Glenn will be a reality...someday!
>SpaceX: Hey FalconHeavy is done
>BO: wait what
They deserve it for sitting on their hands for so long.

>>12701511
Ok

>>12701537
Oldspace (I include BO here) heard SpaceX was designing a new rocket and just assumed it would take 2 decades, when it was flying 8 years later they realized how fucked they were.

>>12701489
1: put stargate on Mars
2: put stargate on Venus
3: PROFIT

>>12701545
When it comes to Starship development when did they actually get serious about it? Like what is the best date you can point to and say “on this day we decided to build a rocket that you know today as Starship”

>>12701563
In 2014 they said something about a "100-ton payload vehicle"

>>12700717
>"TERRAFORMERS could be here" he thought, "I've never been on this planet before. There could be TERRAFORMERS anywhere." The suit's liquid cooling garment felt good against his bare chest. "I HATE TERRAFORMERS" he thought. Space Oddity (2339 Remaster) reverberated his entire suit, making it pulsate even as the $9 tang circulated through his powerful thick veins and washed away his (merited) fear of geoengineers in the void. "With a tube you can live anywhere you want" he said to himself, out loud.

>>12701476
Close to 0

>>12701548
>4: Experience futuristic Byford Dolphin due to pressure difference

>>12701563
Falcon Heavy was announced in 2011, flew in 2019. The best date I can find for BFR is 2012.

>>12701580
Falcon Heavy was also supposed to fly in 2015 initially

>>12700705
Just go with Zubrin's idea of autonomous factories pumping out tetrafluoromethane

anyone know the source of the 3d rendering of detailed ISS(pic related) featured on NASA TV?
is the 3d model publicly accessible?

>and this is our son's room

>>12701592
oh lord now what the hell is that

>Report: NASA’s only realistic path for humans on Mars is nuclear propulsion
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/02/report-nasas-only-realistic-path-for-humans-on-mars-is-nuclear-propulsion/

Has the timeline changed, nukebros?

>>12701592
nigga that's a bunker wtf

>>12701588
>autonomous factories
add that to the list, right under space elevator

>>12701563
Raptor went into development in like 2012 but didn’t actually fire until 2017 (the 2016 version was a 1/3 scale test article). Meanwhile SpaceX didn’t start building Starships until late 2018 when they built hopper.

>>12701596
Unfortunately this is meant to be a distraction and diversion from SpaceX's Starship. They're only pushing NTP now because they want to be able to point at the fact that Starship doesn't use NTP as being a reason why it's not feasible.

>>12701592
do truck drivers like talking about what they're carrying?

>>12701596
If I was rich I'd funnel loads of cash into developing nuclear propulsion.
It's the only logical way to conqueror the solar system.

>>12701599
I want to rough up this girl in a wrestling match that ends up with her getting pregnant

>>12701596
NASA recently asked congress to review the nuke ban and the EU is doing the same. I think they have decided launches are safe enough now to risk it.
Here's hoping they are smart and send up the core and reflectors seperatly so we don't see it banned for another 50 years if it goes wrong.

>>12701604
My grandpa is a truck diver who hauls logs out of the bush, and yes. Truck Drivers will talk about their loads for hours, not exaggerating.

>>12701489
The issue with a high partial pressure co2 atmosphere is that it'll be toxic no matter how much oxygen you add afterwards, (The ratio doesn't matter, its all about partial pressure, it could be 95% oxygen but if there's too much co2 its still toxic), so you can never get an earth-like result from it, you'll have a warm planet but you'll still have to wear an oxygen mask and pray that no atmosphere ever leaks in. With stronger greenhouse gases, you don't have to put so much of them into the atmosphere so there's no need to worry about it ending up toxic, that way you can fill the rest with inert gasses and oxygen and have a regular breathable atmosphere.

>>12701603
Used SLS as reason to go nuclear, old space is still a joke.

>>12701607
>core and reflectors separately
why, why do you think that would make the thing any safer. We can already make these things 100% safe.

>>12701608
I figured they either loved talking about it or hated talking about it. I bet you could get a lot of info from truck drivers hauling parts to boca chica.

>>12701604
Just tap your foot under the stall to signal that you are also a truck driver and strike up a conversation

>>12701605
It's a crime that private individuals are prevented from pursuing their own Orion-style vessels.
Imagine Superheavy putting a nuclear Starship onto a high suborbital arc before the first charge goes off.
Fuck the test ban treaty, hippy fucking shits.

>>12701592
My guess is armor for pipes and wires around a launch stand so if she goes bang some things live.

>>12701604
Yes, especially if it's big / heavy.

>>12701611
Because it can't go critical no matter what happens or how long it sits on the bottom of the ocean.
You could also have a partial core with reflectors in place that is sub-critical until the final piece of core is in place.
This wouldn't be that hard to do in LEO and is a simple way to make sure nothing can go wrong.

Meanwhile the chinks have found one of the Moon's easter eggs.
>https://www.space.com/china-yutu-2-moon-far-side-rover-milestone-discovery

>>12701619
The window was missed.
Trump could've been convinced to let it happen because he's not the smartest. Then once you already get started no one would stop it.

>>12701596
>>12701622
>NTP engines
>Munar steel
>Asteroid mining station
https://futurism.com/space-station-inside-asteroid

Are space engineers just playing KSP nowadays?

>>12701622
What the hell? I thought Yutu rovers died after two weeks up there? The first one did, how is this one still kicking?
>>12701625
Two more decades to slow the spread! (of humanity)

>>12700485
SpaceX has already started construction of the extended cargo section to carry the modules of the Gateway station to the Moon.
It also started the construction of a bigger Dragon module, the Dragon XL, that will be used to transport astronauts to the Moon.
https://youtu.be/tytqEI9PjnY
SpaceX cannot stop winning. SpaceX will colonize the Moon.

>>12701228

>>12701631
>nowadays
Nah, all the most Kerbal ideas are from the 50's, 60's and 70's, these days they are just trying to revive these old ideas.

>>12701646
>Dragon XL
>'50s
"What if we just launched on nuclear fucking bombs?"
>'80s
"Take the whole thing apart after every flight, I don't care how long it takes we're still getting paid"
>'00s
"Return to Moon and Mars, someday! Eventually! When we decide on a plan!"
>'20s
"What if we just made nuclear fucking rockets?"

>>12701596
No, because the report they're referencing all but admits NASA can't do it. It says NASA needs to develop a whole new chemical rocket, design the nuclear reactor basically from scratch and that more research is needed for NTRs all to perform the opposition class mission in pic related.

>>12701649
>Dragon XL
How'd that get in there

>>12701636
False image. ICPS only gives 2.9km/s of delta V to Orion. This is lower than the 3.2 km/s required for TLI. Neat picture but it doesn’t work out

>>12700790
We should genetically modify ourselves and enhance with nano tech to live in Mars or the Moon and be the superior Homo Spaciens.
No try to adapt the environment to us.

>>12701651
>Mars short-stay mission
>Venus swing-by
please please please let this happen one day

>>12700845
>merely

>>12701633
>I thought Yutu rovers died
Secret commie space program

>>12701664
No. The universe bends to Man's will.

>>12701620
>Because it can't go critical no matter what happens or how long it sits on the bottom of the ocean.
>You could also have a partial core with reflectors in place that is sub-critical until the final piece of core is in place.
>This wouldn't be that hard to do in LEO and is a simple way to make sure nothing can go wrong.
You can design your reactor such that it won't go critical when immersed in water, too. Kilopower is designed with this in mind, for example.

>china sends glorified gopro to mars
>200 years later

>>12701636
>Delta IV interstage on a SpaceX ship
What if ULA hides some explosives to sabotage the launch? Not even a sniper needed.

>>12701678
remember the donnager

>>12701676
KIWI-TNT was meant to be incapable of going critical on impact, when tested it did.
I would just rather play it safe than risk turning the public and politicians against NTRs within years of them being allowed.

>>12701664
We should genetically modify ourselves to survive in the vacuum of space. No habitats needed

>>12701657
You're ignoring the fact that Falcon Heavy will run its second stage dry at a velocity higher than just minimum LEO velocity. That is to say, FH will drop off the ICPS+Orion+Service module on an elliptical orbit, just like SLS core stage drops off those things on an elliptical orbit.

>>12701529
>It's a Falcon Heavy competitor, which is to say it's competing for an almost nonexistent market. NG is probably better in terms of rideshare, constellations, and maybe price overall though.

I thought New Glenn was quietly about yeeting an Orion sized manned system into TLI as cheaply as possible and that's why they went with an expendable upper stage.

>>12701696
We should fill all of space with 1 bar atmosphere so we don't need suits.

>>12701691
I would rather have NTR cores designed such that when immersed in water they go prompt-supercritical and detonate like a low efficiency nuclear warhead, because it would be funny.

>>12701596
>Has the timeline changed, nukebros?
No

>>12701703
I like the way you think anon.

>>12701577
you put the Venus stargate on a blimp, then you can regulate the pressure differential

>>12701701
become the suit

>>12701711
If you call that 'life', it's like it lives inside it's own asshole. I'd rather breath hard vacuum for the short time it takes to kill me then ever be that floating testicle monster.

>>12701701
But even if you could prevent the gas from collapsing via gravity, beyond a certain volume it would become a black hole (because black holes grow in volume faster than they grow in mass, which means for an arbitrarily low density there exists a corresponding volume at which you can form a black hole. Fun fact the observable universe is like 3% less dense than the density it'd need to be to form a black hole with the same radius as the observable universe.

>>12701718
>collapsing all of reality into a final black hole
I stand by my idea, this is best for all

>>12701675
Why not? we are naturally evolving to the superior human-crab form, we may as well speed up the process and go all the way and be a space faring species, adapted to any planet, any atmosphere.

>>12701636
Has Musk said anything about seriously colonising the moon or setting anything permanent up on it’s surface before?

Seems like it would be a good learning experience in preparation for Mars.

>>12701726
Whatever that thing is, it's not human and should be killed. I guess it's far enough removed to not be cannibalism which is good because I kind of want to crack that thing's claw open and dip it in butter.

>>12701729
No which is kinf of stupid as you would think testing everything you need to develop 3 days from earth is better than doing your first live run at least 6 months from earth and upto 24 months from earth.

>>12701729
He's literally said multiple times that they will do Moon shit for anyone who wants Moon shit to happen. The goal of SpaceX is to get high capacity manned transport to Mars, and accomplishing that necessarily gets you high capacity manned transport to the Moon. Also allows missions to Near Earth Asteroids as well but those have unique challenges and are also not really worth it until we already have a decent amount of experience doing low G mining and manufacture (which we will likely learn to do on Phobos).

>>12701742
??? What are you gonna test on the Moon that is going to actually matter for Mars

>>12701726
t.

>>12701596
This is just sad

>>12701753
>habs
>atmospheric controls
>power generation
>plant growth
>suits
>vehicles
You are basically doing another Biosphere experiment but this time if it turns to shit everyone dies.

>habs
>atmospheric controls
>power generation
>plant growth
>suits
>vehicles
all of which can be tested on earth

>>12701758
>$2bn per flight
And people ask why I hate SLS

When can we expect spaceships like THIS?

>>12701729
Not really but is inescapable.
The Moon is closer, we can make mistakes in the Moon and get away with it and learn in the process.
Mars is too far away, we can`t make mistakes, and the reality is that we need at least nuclear thermal engines to go to Mars and Mini nuclear reactors to power colonies there. We have everything else.
Falcon heavy will reach Moon, and stablish the fundations of a permanent Moon base, then Starship will be tested and will hell enlarge Moon base, and then, with a product tested and proven we can attempt to go to Mars (with nuclear propulsion).

>>12701758
>NASA needs $20 billion just for fuel to go to Mars
>Elon can probably send 100 Starships to Mars for $1 billion

>>12701767
~800 years from now

>>12701696
but then probably the females would look like shit with all those modifications.
of course you could say you just modify your braint o like them
but at that point why not modify your brain to like sitting perfectly motionless like in that comic about hte time traveler
it all boils down to philosophy

>>12701768
What does SHLLV mean?

>>12701775
super heavy load launch vehicle ?

>>12701764
They can be tested with low UV, defused light, 1G, comfortable temperatures ect.
If launches are ~$2m as he is claiming it would be insane not to spend ~$12m to test this shit on the moon and see how it goes without an atmosphere as that is basically the situation on Mars.

>>12701736
>Whatever that thing is, it's not human and should be killed
Imagine a Homo Erectus complaining that a Homo Sapiens is not human and should be killed. You are a primitive luddite. I am gonna run after you with my pincers. Embrace the superior crab form.

>>12701765
Really? Who knows what SLS is and doesn't hate it?

What’s the point of doing this. I don’t even think those pathfinder engines are capable of firing. They are movie props. This whole rocket is stupid and they would be better off going with SSME’s or RS-68’s honestly

>>12701609
Plants will love it, but the more important part is getting the partial pressure up high enough that you don't need a pressure suit for your body.

>>12701777
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_heavy-lift_launch_vehicle
Yes

>>12701777
Oh, I'm used to just calling it a big dumb booster.
Now I feel dumb.

>>12700485
I had a bad dream where SN10 took off but it’s Raptors failed immediately and it crashed back into the pad and blew everything up true story

>>12701781
>What’s the point of doing this
To show congress how much progress they have made and that they are really close to being ready to launch, they just need a few more years and another 6 billion.

>>12701780
You know, I know, the average retard doesn't. Shit most of them don't even know NASA is making another rocket.
>>12701779
You seem to have scuttled into my bucket crabman.

>>12701767
Ignoring the fact that ship's propulsion system was extremely unrealistic, mobile rotating spaceships that big probably won't be a thing for 300-400 years.
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1359591780010889219
>>12701770
its sad really

>>12701781
I know those are fake engines but is that an actual core stage?

>>12701785
>550t
Is this short tons, long tons, or tonnes?

>>12701788
>wake up anon! what? starship? whats that? how can a spacecraft ever be so reusable space is hard you silly. Altough i get your enthusiasm SLS announced that it might do its first flight in 2030, isnt it a great time to be alive!

>>12701781
It's probably to test ground equipment.

Has anyone read any studies that have looked at ways of capturing asteroids into a stable Earth orbit? I was thinking about plasma magnet sails and about how we could use one to yank on an asteroid, using the Dawn spacecraft as a baseline for maneuverability.
Dawn had a total wet mass of ~1200 kg and could produce 90 mN of thrust. If we assume this is a minimum practical thrust to mass ratio, and we assume that we have a plasma magnet sail that can produce a thrust force of 50 kN, then we can yank an asteroid with a mass of about 670,000 metric tons, which is decent.
To move bigger asteroids, what we may do is just remove 670,000 ton chunks of it at a time, assuming of course that we can't build larger magnet sails for whatever reason. We could even use the spin rate of the asteroid as a boost, by building 500 km long steel cable space elevators and using the centripetal force to slingshot heavy ass rocks with a few hundred m/s of delta V.

>>12701801
Presumably yes, although I'm willing to bet it isn't flight worthy. They probably did minimal isogrid milling and stuff. I think it is just a test article to help ULA workers test installing engines and transporting it to the pad and stuff

>>12701799
>Clipper unchained
When will JWST get the same treatment? It's still supposed to explode on SLS isn't it?

>>12701793
>You seem to have scuttled into my bucket crabman.

>>12701760
No, Biosphere was stupid. In real life on Mars they will have access to unlimited amounts of CO2, water and nitrogen, not to mention all the rocky mineral resources. Anyway none of those things you mentioned require going to the Moon to test.

>>12701803
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_heavy-lift_launch_vehicle
tonnes

>>12701808
>space elevator
You had me at first but then you went full autism. I will stay on topic though and ask about plasma magnetic sails. Is it just a meme or could it actually do useful work? What exactly are the limits of PMS's? Could we build a huge one and use it to carefully move some huge comets/asteroids and crash them into Venus?

>>12701826
Gross!

>>12700640
Maybe it's the house elon will launch to orbit.

>>12701815
No it flies on the Ariane V: The Phantom Pain. A5 is a good vehicle but JWST is over complicated.

>>12701768
>Mars is too far away, we can`t make mistakes, and the reality is that we need at least nuclear thermal engines to go to Mars and Mini nuclear reactors to power colonies there. We have everything else.
Retard get out. You can make mistakes when you're sending at least 1000 to 1500 tons of payload per 100 people, and all the technology is simple and robust enough to be repaired in situ by a normal plumber/welder/electrician. You can send 1000 MWe power generation and storage capacity using cheap flexible solar panels much more rapidly and cheaply than nuclear power options, I'm a nuclear advocate but I accept that it's just too caught up in red tape and a lot of the advantages of it go away when you don't have huge natural liquid phase cooling reservoirs to take advantage of. Finally no, you don't need NTP to do manned missions to Mars. You just need ISRU propellant production. NTP is taking the wrong approach to solving the delta V budget problem, which is to say it's chasing Isp rather than using what we know (chemical propulsion) in a more effective manner.

>>12701592
I thought consensus was that it's for the super heavy launch platform? I was wondering why it was taking them so long to build it. I thought for sure it would be out of concrete.

>>12701847
NTP is literally a meme and anyone thag supports it just watched two Isaac Awfuh videos and got hard. NTR pushes Mars back decades

>>12701778
You could literally test it in LEO, it's the same situation except no apparent gravity, which doesn't matter because both Mars and Moon have sub-Earth gravity anyway.

>>12701781
>they would be better off going with SSME’s or RS-68’s honestly
This is literally never the case. Never ever.

>>12701845
Huh I don't know why I thought it was bound to SLS like Clipper, that's good at least since despite being retarded I'd still like to see JWST do something besides sit around or explode.
What's that goliath of a telescope in your gif anon? I want THAT in orbit.

>>12701855
Zero gravity =/= low gavity. I'm sure a lot of the plumbing will make use of gravity because why use pumps for everything when you have gravity at your destination?

>>12701845
The big one is called LUVOIR. Think of JWST but giant as fuck. Apparently it’s actually easier to build because it’s a visible light observatory so you don’t need dozens of layers of thin shielding like on JWST, and if you rip some, so what? It’s also designed to fly on Starship

>>12701866
Ah damn meant for >>12701858

>>12701863
Spinning for .1 of a G, or .4 for Mars G is easy enough in LEO to test things out

Just have to send Mexican welders to LEO to slap some struts together

>>12701847
>, you don't need NTP to do manned missions to Mars
Yes you do.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a34622021/thermal-nuclear-engine-mars/
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/02/report-nasas-only-realistic-path-for-humans-on-mars-is-nuclear-propulsion/
https://www.universetoday.com/149640/the-uk-is-considering-nuclear-propulsion-in-space/
https://youtu.be/1yXpkQ6eD-w

It is better to eliminate the red tape, than to ask conventional rockets things they cannot do.

>>12701866
love that NASA had to ask permission

>>12701845
Wait that means JWST will have to be transported to French Guiana via boat. Talk about tempting fate.

>>12701866
How fast could they build one of these? Imagine JWST getting made obsolete before it's even left the ground, holy shit.
>>12701874
"Hey google: how do you hire privateers?"

>>12701872
Bruh even NASA admits that NTP is not needed for Mars. Most of their proposals for Mars missions use either hydrolox, hypergolics, or electric propulsion.

Pic related was the “official” NASA Mars plan back in 2017.

>>12701853
Your meme is prover tech from the 70s that has not been used due to political reasons.

https://youtu.be/UDhbTNiuKp4
https://youtu.be/866C4qKgzeg
https://youtu.be/N2uXPn7rHm0

Imagine how much we could do with modern technology, instead of muh dangerous.

>>12701873
? They are asking for payload numbers obviously

>>12701885
Okay but NTP requires zero boil off of hydrogen in space. That shit is awful. You need two big leaps in tech (ZBO hydrogen and NTR) for it to work

>>12701874
Yes. They aren't announcing the shipping date because they fear pirates may steal it and hold it for ransom.

>>12701890
>Elon’s PMC steals it and launches it on Falcon Heavy
You’re face...to face...with the man who sold the world

>>12701885
The advantages are minimal to none, too much regulatory bullshit that’ll never change

>>12701881
>Bruh even NASA admits that NTP is not needed for Mars.

>Believing what NASA boomers think
Anon I...

>>12701890
POV: You are an engineer on JWST and was just told the dockworkers dropped your telescope into the ocean while trying to load it onto a boat.

>>12701830
>space elevator
>You had me at first but then you went full autism.
Space elevators from asteroids are fine. I'm not saying a space elevator around the Earth, which is retarded and impossible. For example the biggest asteroid, Ceres, spins fast enough and has low enough gravity that you can use a conventional steel wire rope ~1000 km long to build a space elevator, and it's no big deal. On much smaller asteroids like Bennu you could use a 10 km steel rope as a space elevator.
All a space elevator is is a structure that allows you to extract the rotational momentum of an object and use it to disassemble that object to a degree.

>>12701228

>>12701872
While I'm all for NTRs they aren't NEEDED for a Mars mission, they would just make it a lot easier.
Personally I see the best near-term use being NTR tugs dragging payloads from LEO to TLI then seperating and returning to LEO which another NTR tug catches it from it's free-return trajectory and puts it in LLO.
This way you could have a huge LLO fuel depot / station to run landers from to support lunar bases.

>>12701906
>1000km steel elevator
>no big deal

>>12701903
>"It's only in a few meters of water, we can winch it out for you if ya want"

>>12701906
>Build a space elevator on something with an escape velocity of 514 m/s
Why?

>>12701912
NTR is shit when you have something like Starship which can just aerocapture at Mars.

>>12701689
>most powerfull ship in the entire expanse universe
>gets it shit kicked in every time it's on screen.

>>12701897
>A reduction of travel time from 9 months to 3 months with all that entails in reduction of storage of food, equipment, supplies, etc is not important.

Anon I..

>>12701940
its 6 months to 3 months, not 9 months to 6 months

>solves your martian energy problems

>>12701940
So the sole advantage of doubling/tripling Isp is saving a few months on travel time, which doesn’t matter in the slightest since mars is only availible for a transfer every 2.2 years

>>12701931
Is the NTR engine what I think it is?

>>12701940
We already have astronauts spend long stretches of time in space. Yes they do it below the van allen belt, but the food and supplies reduction are not a significant mass reduction. All you're doing is reducing the amount of ambient radiation exposure which is not that much to begin with (assuming there's a faraday cage for any solar wind events). It's a waste of time and effort and certainly not worth delaying the trip by 10+ years to accommodate it.

>>12701940
Starship can do 3 months too bruv. A 6 km/s burn to Mars with starship is just that, then you spend nothing to aerocapture into orbit. Nuclear thermal would see a 6 km/s burn to Mars and like 4-5 km/s to break into orbit. It’s a lot less efficient

>>12701955
Isp is efficiency, like miles per gallon, it lets you go farther, not faster.
Throost is what makes you go faster.
Ion engines have excellent Isp but not even the thrust of a rubber band.

>>12701955
>So the sole advantage of doubling/tripling Isp is saving a few months on travel time
No, if you double the ISP you double the payload you can move with the same weight of propellant.
When NERVA was being played with it looked like ISPs of ~5000 were possible which would mean over ten times the payload for the same fuel load. This turns the rocket equation on it's head and now you can have an upper stage that is 90% payload and 10% fuel instead of the other way around.

>>12701908
What was that rocket they moved out of the factory a while ago?

THE AUGURIES HAVE BEEN TAKEN FOR STARLINK 19 AND THEY HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BE UNFAVORABLE FOR LAUNCH TONIGHT. THE NEW DATE FOR LAUNCH IS 11:20 PM EASTERN TIME ON THE 14 OF THIS MONTH.

IN THE FAR AWAY LANDS OF KAZAKHSTAN, A RUSSIAN SOYUZ ROCKET WILL LAUNCH THE 77TH PROGRESS CARGO DELIVERY SHIP TO THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION

25 MINUTES AFTER EXPECTED STARLINK LAUNCH THE RUSSIAN SOYUZ IS SCHEDULED TO FLY AT 11:45 PM EASTERN TIME ON THE 14TH

LAUNCH THREADS WILL BE PROVIDED BY MARCUS ANONYMOUS PRIOR TO LAUNCH.

BE AWARE, NO DISORDER WILL BE TOLERATED. ANY FOUND FURRY POSTERS ARE ORDERED TO BE STONED.

THIS LAUNCH UPDATE WAS PROVIDED BY THE GUILD OF ASTERIOD MINERS.
TRUE ROMAN MINERALS, FOR TRUE ROMANS!

>>12701975
A pathfinder core think of it like Starship MK1 or something

>>12701949
>Steam
Miss me with that shit
Supercritical CO2 Brayton turbines are the the thermal energy of the future

>>12701975
A papier-mache mockup they took for a ride to make sure they still remember how it's done. Would be too embarrassing if they take out a real one when the time comes and ding it on a lamp post or drop into the ditch

>Alpha Centauri Seems To Also Have a Habitable Zone Planet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-H-hvTnj9EA

>>12701872
You NEVER need NTP unless you need more than 8 km/s of delta V out of a single stage. That is literally the only thing that could make higher Isp propulsion a REQUIREMENT.
A mission to Mars only needs 4 km/s of delta V to achieve an interplanetary intercept trajectory. If you want to cut down the transfer time to ~4 months you need ~6 km/s. Starship with full tanks and full payload has >6 km/s, so it WILL work.
Now, sure, if you irrationally and arbitrarily decide that all Mars mission transfers MUST take place in under 3 months, or that all of the propellant used for the mission MUST come from Earth and also MUST be no more than 50% of the total vehicle mass, then yeah, you can fuck with the mission until the numbers tell you you need an Isp of >800 seconds in order to accomplish the mission.

I'll feed you a little bit though. NTP would be a great enabler for manned missions to the main asteroid belt as well as to Jupiter. This is because the single-leg delta V requirements for these missions are much higher (ie the burn to just get onto a Jupiter Intercept is much larger and would be difficult to supply with a chemical rocket stage of practical mass). However a more optimal usage for NTP in such a mission profile would not actually have the NTP engines fire to perform the transfer to Jupiter: instead we would want to use a large reusable chemical departure stage to give the actual interplanetary spacecraft a nice 5 km/s kick out from an elliptical Earth orbit (after which it would do a pre-escape capture burn leading to a series of aerobraking passes to return to an orbit where it can be refueled), and the spacecraft would use its own chemical propulsion system to complete the transfer burn to Jupiter, as well as the capture burn some years later. The nuclear thermal propulsion engines would actually be used on single stage launch vehicles meant to act as a means of cargo and human transport down to the surface of Callisto or Ganymede.

>>12702001
Now the question is does it have an atmosphere?
If so, we could terraform it

>>12702015
It seems to be neptune massed, so a gas giant. It could have habitable moons though, like pandora from avatar

>>12702029
Even better, now it would have a magnetic field protecting its moons

>>12701973
> When NERVA was being played with it looked like ISPs of ~5000 were possibl

Not at all, those were just paper designs of liquid / gas core NTR which hand waves the issue of actually building them

Chasing Isp is the same old stupid idea, all that matters is $ per ton to the destination

Guys, combined nuclear power/thermal engine with plasma magnetic sail equipped spacecraft

>>12702046
Alpha Centauri doesn’t have the radiation issues desu

>>12701899
Boomers are the ones who believe NTP is needed for Mars, anon.
>>12701916
It literally would not be a big deal. We're talking about a 1000 km long cable hanging in a maximum of 0.03 G. You could probably make a space elevator on Ceres using polyethylene if you wanted. Anyway with space elevators the way you intuitively guess at the feasibility is to look at the gravity and the rotation period. A faster rotation period and lower gravity means easier space elevator. Earth takes 24 hours to turn and has 1 G and would require atomically precise meme materials to work. Mars has the same rotation rate but 3/8ths the gravity and could be done with high quality carbon fiber/medium quality long length nanotubes. The Moon has a shit rotation rate but luckily the Earth is nearby and the Moon only has 1/6th Earth gravity, so you can use steel or aluminum wires to reach from the sub-terrestrial point on the Moon straight up past the Earth-Moon L1 point and hold onto a counterweight to keep the cable in tension, kinda like hanging a plumb bob off of the Moon and climbing the cable to jump off into orbit high up. You can also do this off of Mars's moons, and there you only need a cable a few hundred km long to get beyond the hill spheres of those tiny gravity wells.
>>12701923
Because a space elevator is actually useful for lifting massive payloads into space rapidly. For example, a steel cable or group of cables with an effective combined diameter of 2000 mm would be able to suspend 500,000 metric tons of material off of the surface of Ceres. As this load climbed the cable it would exert less force too, making it easier to climb faster. At an average climbing speed of 50 km/h it would only take ~20 hours to deliver the payload to a Ceres-synchronous orbit (I'm eyeballing the distances here, the actual orbit would be lower). Then we can assume another 20 hours to go down and at least 8 hours to load and unload cargo mass. That's 500 kilotons every 48 hours.

>>12701978
based, thank you

>>12702052
Chasing Isp for you workhorse LVs is a stupid idea, spending 5% of the SLS budget on R&D isn't.

>>12702078
>Because a space elevator is actually useful for lifting massive payloads
Thats all good and well but now you have 500,000 tonnes in Ceres orbit that I suspect you plan to send somewhere else. Given that is going to take several km/s delta-v does saving 500 m/s really justify a huge construction project?

>>12701949
>omits the radiator mass
Anon the radiators are the heaviest part in any situation where you can't use convection to effectively cool your shit. This includes in orbit as well as on Mars, because Mars' atmosphere is too thin to effectively use and trying to use the ground as a heat sink only works for a limited time until the block of ground you're dumping heat into has warmed up enough to stop being effective.

>>12702078
Cite your studies on 1000 km long cables that can hold upwards of 50,000 tons

>>12701949
Nuclear>solar

It's crazy how NASA struggled over a decade to complete the thing, it will never get the centrifuge module, the closest thing to habitat module will be another space station temporarily docked to it, and then few years before it's decommissioned, it will be getting a new module from imaginary nation.

>>12701972
Dude, Isp literally is what sets your top speed. Thrust only tells you your peak acceleration. Acceleration over time results in velocity, and increasing Isp will result in greater final velocity all other things (mass ratio) being equal.

>>12701973
>When NERVA was being played with it looked like ISPs of ~5000 were possible
No, NERVA would not have been able to get >1000 Isp. Still decent but not anywhere close to 5000 Isp. That level of efficiency is reserved for open cycle gas core only, not the piddly solid core that was NERVA.

>>12702093
I feel like it the same way I feel about the shuttle. They’re icons that formed a generation but once you learn more about them the less appealing they are. At least the ISS gave rise to the Falcon 9. Also some Dragon hardware flew on the Space Shuttle lol

>>12702065
Would be good for out planet missions. Use 3km/s propulsive capacity to get out of Earth's magnetic field influence, use plasma magnet sail to accelerate to a cruising speed set by your braking capability on arrival (NOT maximum speed, you'll be stuck without the delta V to slow down unless you're headed to Neptune), capture with plasma magnet sail then use NTP to maneuver into orbit of an icy irregular moon with low gravity. Now you set up a fingerhold base on that moon and start manufacturing propellants (mostly inert for NTP but some chemical too).
The big problem is that on the return leg your plasma magnet sail is useless except to do some braking before running into the Earth's SOI. This return burn will likely set the delta V minimum requirements for the NTP system.

>>12702113
If the United States goes from "operates big space station" to "has no space station" it'll be like losing the Shuttle with no replacement all over again, and I'm STILL mad about that shit.

>>12700485
Does anyone else kinda miss when Tim Dodd would make his spaceflight videos about a certain topic? Nowadays all he does is stream shit

>>12701476

None. We are the only intelligent life in the visible universe.

>>12702121
It seems like we’ve learned from our mistakes. I’m sure you could launch a Cygnus and dock a Dragon with it and call it a station.

>>12701636
>Dragon XL, that will be used to transport astronauts to the Moon
IIRC Dragon XL is for cargo delivery only since the Heavy isn't human rated.

>>12702093
Speaking of abandoned ISS concepts, do you think the Crew Return Vehicle would have been able to serve a a general crew transport vehicle had it been developed? NASA could have potentially had a Shuttle replacement pretty much to moment the Shuttle was retired

>>12702088
>Thats all good and well but now you have 500,000 tonnes in Ceres orbit that I suspect you plan to send somewhere else. Given that is going to take several km/s delta-v does saving 500 m/s really justify a huge construction project?
Nope, the idea would be to use it on a massive industrial scale for manufacturing shit in space. Spin habitats and large balls for storing propellants and the like.
Oh, and there's no reason to stop at Ceres-stationary orbit. If you go higher, as in make the cable longer, you can effectively built it long to the point of nearing your material strength limits, then use this elevator as a massive slingshot for imparting multiple km/s of delta V to these massive payloads in one go. If you let go of a space elevator below surface-stationary orbital altitude, you fall down into an ellipse. If you let go ABOVE that altitude, you fall UP into an ellipse. You don't need to go far beyond this stationary orbit altitude to reach centripetal acceleration forces that enable you to reach well beyond escape velocity just by letting go of the cable.
Again though the idea isn't just mining Ceres for materials to send somewhere else. The idea is that it makes more sense to build up orbital habitat swarms around Ceres instead of bothering to try to colonize its surface, because the surface is so close to orbit in terms of energy. May as well dispense with all the issues of dust and other problems living on an ancient rock and live in free floating terrariums instead. For other places this doesn't make as much sense but Ceres is literally inside the asteroid belt anyway and thus will be surrounded by solar-orbiting swarms of habitats eventually, so it may as well go with the orbital way of life to make trade easier.

>>12701718
>Fun fact the observable universe is like 3% less dense than the density it'd need to be to form a black hole with the same radius as the observable universe.
Is this counting dark matter or not? If it's counting dark matter that's a pretty strong argument for Quantized Inertia.

>>12701887
Just do pulsed NTR and take the 50% Isp hit from liquid water propellant. 5000s Isp and a dense, non cryogenic propellant beats the piss out of 70s tier NERVA LH2.

>>12702115
>on the return leg your plasma magnet sail is useless
Jeff Greason's been working on that: https://tauzero.aero/a-reaction-drive/
Too bad there seems to be no interest in building or testing it

>>12702140
Yes, easily. Look at how little delta-V that Crew Dragon needs to reach the ISS after separation from the upper Falcon stage. Just make the RCS stronger.

>>12702168
>just do some meme engine that doesn’t actually exist hehehe
>and use water instead of methane because....... ?

>>12702121
>>12702137
just launch a couple dozen inflatable modules on starship and you'll get a new station that is literally 100x bigger for like 1/1000th of the price of the iss

>>12702122
The raptor comparison video remains the only worthwhile thing he's done

>>12702183
Inflatable is a meme, launch rolls of steel and a dozen Mexican welders to make a nice 50 meter diameter sphere

>>12702169
Have you actually looked at that thing? A Q ship needs at least five plasma magnet sails (so multiple kilometers of high temperature superconducting wire) and another propulsion system to get it up to about 0.03c. A hybrid plasma magnet / BNTR system gets you Venus, Mars, the Belt, and maybe the inner three gas giants depending on how high you can crank the thrust and Isp. It also only requires enough high temperature superconducting wire for a single sail.

>>12702174
Because ice ISRU is easier than methane most places.

Call me a shill whatever but the Raptor engines are a complex piece of garbage. Which is ironic considering Musk has an autistic aversion for something even mundane as redundancy.

These things aren't in a million fucking years going to make it on a long fucking trip to Mars and relight for a meme landing. Let alone doing a return trip (lmao).

>>12702091
Sure, you know the golden gate bridge cables? The ones that are a bit under a meter wide? Yeah you could use four of those.
>but they're only 2.331 km long!
Yeah, and in Earth gravity, while holding up a, 887,000 ton bridge. Now reduce the gravity to 0.029% of Earth gravity (3450 times less) and you find that the cable would experience the same strain on Ceres if it were 8042 km long. Which means we already know we can build a cable with the specific strength necessary to build a space elevator on Ceres with at least an 8x engineering safety factor. Now, it wouldn't make sense to build this massive cable in one go and deploy is all at once, instead we would do it the same way they built the cables for the GGB, one wire at a time. Each wire would also be self supporting with an 8x safety factor so this would not be an issue. Once we had enough of a cable that we could install a climber, we could use that climber to pull bundles of wire up every two days until the cable was completed.

>>12702202
Perform mid-course-engine-swaps with spares from the cargo bay, naturally

>>12702221
lol

>>12702202
>AOT pic
>Retarded post
Like clockwork

>>12702202
ok shill

>>12702202
spacex stans hated him...for he told the truth....

>>12702212
Not him but would building a giant space elevator on Ceres really even be worth the cost? Also how exactly would you get the climber to climb at 50km/h? That seems really high for something like this, especially at these distances and masses.

>>12702202
>Cutting edge rocket engine is complex
No shit Sherlock.
The Merlin went through multiple iterations over the years before it became a mature rocket engine and the same applies to Raptor.

>>12702232
>no argument
Yikes.

Call me cucked but I'm really enjoying these multi-national Mars missions. It's fun to see these different countries all committing to exploration like this, and maybe we'll even get multiple different colonies on Mars if that ever comes to be.

>>12702257
You haven't provided any as well, faggot.

>>12702261
The last thing we need is a race war on a different planet

>>12702261
global collaboration on space efforts has proven itself to be a dumb meme. Competition was always the only real solution. Biden needs to make fun of the Chinese if their lander crashes and stoke a new space race.

>>12702255
>Why yes Musky wuskies DINO engines are going to survive a months long journey to another planet and flawless preform a propulsive landing in ten years
O-Only a couple million more iterations and we'll have it, xbros! I sure do love STEEL and SCIENCE! #teamspace

>>12702270
Probably should get your eyes checked. >>12702202

>>12702286
absolutely based

>>12702202
>Musk has an autistic aversion for something even mundane as redundancy
Aren't most critical systems on F9/Dragon- like computers- triple redundant?

>>12702261
We are seeing the start of a new space race and with any luck we will live long enough to see space be extremely profitable for the winners.

Why do you faggots KEEP replying to obvious fucking baits? Derails the thread every single FUCKING time, kys faggots

>>12702296
Why are nonwhites allowed on mars? It should be a white ethnostate

>>12702292
Yes, because they're just regular computers running Linux instead of expensive rad-hardened chips.

>>12702296
ugghh i can't stop getting baited, bait me harder daddy unngghh soijack me

Janny Magnus, I have a question concerning your friend and co-poster, the darling of Reddit, Gaius Anonymus Faegot. >>12702286
Why does his head remain empty? Why does he not go home?
His illegal shitposting is over. /sfg/ is long since on her knees.
Why does he keep us brave posters from our discussions and memes?
For an entire week he has gorged himself like a faggot on (you)'s of bait and thereby made himself monstrously rich.
WHY?
Why does the ply the mob with earlythreads and furfaggotry and gaudy /pol/ posts?
Why has he given (you)'s to every reprobate fool in this thread?
WHY?
I tell you why he does those things. He wants to buy himself a 4chan pass. He wants to destroy the /sfg/ general and rule /sci/ as a bloody Mod! That's why!

Therefore, I move that these faggot's posts in this thread be terminated immediately, that their IPs be banned, and for them to be recalled to /qa/ to answer charges of illegal shitposting, bait, faggotry and treason!

>>12702261
American-Japanese cooperation is cool. I'm looking forward to going to the moon with the Japs to fight the Chinese.

>>12702150
Yes, if it wasn't counting dark matter then we'd be over 300% of the mass necessary to turn the observable universe into a black hole.

>>12702296
Thanks mom. Or should I say...SPACEX SHILL

>>12702309
No true Roman.

>>12700485
Call me a shill whatever but the BE-4 engines are a complex piece of garbage. Which is ironic considering Bezos has an autistic aversion for something even mundane as redundancy.
These things aren't in a million fucking years going to make it on a launch trip to orbit and relight for a meme landing. Let alone be refurbished for 25 flights (lmao).

>>12702305
>NO MUSKY you have to buy from an aerospace supplier for millions of dollars and a decade out of date!

>>12702174
Other than on Titan, water is the only easily accessible hyperabundant outer solar system propellant. For basic transportation architecture it'll make sense to use water NTR rather than methane for the same reason it makes sense to use fuel oil on Earth rather than synthesized exotic fuels.

>arguing over who gets to settle mars
Living in space is going to be a lot smarter, spin up a cylinder and you're done. No need to live down a gravity well

>>12702316
All engines start out shit, the F-1 kept ripping itself apart for years.
That said BO is shit and I'm going to laugh if ULA is stuck asking SpaceX for engines for the Vulcan.

>>12702140
It won't be HL-20/Dream Chaser level of comfort, but I can see that.

>>12702323
The infrastructure y tecnologiá build a cylinder in space do not exist yet

>>12702198
Based, except instead of a sphere make it a 50x200 meter cylinder with hemisphere caps.

>>12702328
I’m an HL-42 fan myself

>>12702330
And the infrastructure to live on Mars exists even less. You can build a cylinder right here in LEO, a lot less risk and you can iterate designs much faster

>>12702338
No it doesn’t wtf. It’s literally just tubes covered by sand. We don’t have the tech to build a gigantic space colony and even if we did we have no way of building the asteroid mining facilities and whatnot without spending trillions

>>12700640
I hope they keep it forever, imagine 10 years from now when Boca Chica becomes the industrial mecca of the world, and in the heart of it all stands a cute little house.

>>12702309
Good thread, this.

>>12702316
Cool shitpost and all but would you actually bet money on BE-4 NOT making it to orbit before Raptor lands on Mars?

You probably thought your copy & paste post was reaaaaaal clever, huh?

>>12702347
Two different goalposts. Do you think Raptor makes it to orbit before BE-4? How about the Karman line?

>>12702346
Blessed space romans

>>12702251
>Not him but would building a giant space elevator on Ceres really even be worth the cost?
Sure, this only depends on the scale of the industry/civilization you have built up around Ceres. If you're aiming for orbital habitat arrays carrying billions of people then yeah you're probably going to have thousands of elevators like this.
>Also how exactly would you get the climber to climb at 50km/h?
Electricity and motors, I guess. You would probably want dozens if not hundreds of wheel elements clamped onto the cable (or cables) to distribute the gripping pressure and avoid deforming the wires. However supplying the energy to the motors necessary to apply a few tens of kilonewtons of lifting force is not a huge problem. The elevator could carry a power plant with it, in the form of a suspended thin film solar array, or it could use beamed power systems, or maybe nuclear but that's probably the worst of both worlds. One interesting idea would be to have the entire elevator actually made of a loop of cable with two very large drums on either end that it wrapped around, meaning that static attachment points could be installed along the cable and allow for continuous flow of material from the surface (think kinda like an excalator, or a bucket conveyor, but 1000 km long and with several hundred meters of bare cable between buckets, and also each "bucket" is actually a pre-loaded shipping container stuffed with products or raw materials). Anyway there are lots of ways you can imagine doing this.

>>12702347
>y-yeah well before spessex makes the greatest achievement in spaceflight history, my guy will finally get into orbit
hahahah imagine being this scared

>>12702363
Chud

>>12702271
The first thing we need is a race war on this planet.

>>12702347
I bet it will make it to orbit before Raptor makes its first Mars landing, but it isn't out of the question that it could be the other way around. If Musk lands his rocket on Mars before any Blue Origin hardware gets to LEO I will laugh my ass off

>>12702367
I am half Mexican half polish what do I do bro

>>12701439
Perseverance landing is just a few days away.

>>12702350
>moves goalposts from original discussion into another galaxy
>"huuuuuuuuuuur two different goalposts" LOL
But the answer for (You) is probably not but that wasn't the discussion now was it? Answer the original question, kiddo.

>>12702362
I don't think I fully understand what you mean by the "loop cable with drums on the end" idea.

I need to ride on this ship, bros

>>12702375
Label yourself double-Catholic and you will be granted brotherhood

>>12702375
Stand still

>>12702365
No racism, please.

>>12702347
>orbit vs Mars landing
What kind of Bezos bullshit is this? BE-4 was in development before Raptor so first to LEO wins IMO, this even gives BO the advantage that they aren't making the LV.

>>12702377
>crashing

>>12702387
Raptor has fired longer in flight than BE-4 ever will lol.

>>12702382
Based and Archbishop-of-Mars-pilled

>>12702139
Sure, but a lot can happen in the next 3 years.

>>12702122
Yeah because his videos were worth watching then

>>12702363
>IN UNDER TEN YEARS MUSKER WUSKERS MONSTER STEEL DILDO POWERED BY THE STATE OF THE ART FEATHERED REPTILE ENGINES ARE GOING TO MAKE IT TO ORBIT PREFORM MULTIPLE PROPELLANT REFILS AND MAKE IT SIX MONTHS TO MARS TO DO A SUICIDE (literal here) MEME LANDING ON THE BIG RED DIRTY BOY
Trust me I am not. I'm sitting here laughing thinking about you #teamspace retards. This shit is comical.

>>12702202
Shill

>>12702323
Okay but getting there is a massive leap, and massive leaps usually take a lot of tries and require dumbfuck levels of funding which attracts leaches.

It's better to first off develop high capacity high reusability launch systems. Then, with those systems as a base capability, develop Moon and Mars colonization efforts. Figure out how to effectively do ISRU away from Earth. Cool, now we have a few decades of experience making steel and shit in space away from Earth, now lets figure out how to adapt those systems to working in microgravity, by setting up ISRU on the closest asteroid-like bodies to our preexisting points of activity in space, which is going to be Mars' moons.
Cool, now we are building space habitats using materials refined from ores mined from asteroid-like objects. Now let's figure out a way of effectively doing that away from the support of any planets, in the asteroid belt.
Fast forward 100 years and there is a loose group of colony spacecraft/orbiters/stations that move through the asteroid belt and generally continue to mine and construct and multiply. These niggas are working with so much material in such little gravity that it's not even a big deal for them to slap together a 1 billion ton spacecraft with a 100 million ton structural dry mass and a crew of 20,000 to go out to the outer planets and act as a robust colony from day one. Therefore colonization of the entire solar system becomes relatively trivial even without the development of Q>1 fusion propulsion systems.

But we need to set up colonies on Moon and Mars first to get there because otherwise it's going to be fucking around with the Boings and Lockmarts of the future, forever, and going nowhere.

>>12701497
>>12701511
engine layout is kinda odd
>OVALweb

>>12702426
Shut up Chud cylinders are the future
>Mister Bezos please release my family

>>12702377
>perseverance crash landing is just a few days away

What's the purpose of this rebar structure? Sorry, don't know shit about construction.

>>12702387
>What kind of Bezos bullshit is this?
Hmmmm I don't know... probably the whatever "bullshit" that was going through the retards mind who copied a post about Raptor going to mars almost word for word and trying to equate BO making it to orbit. You know, the poster the reply was directed towards.

I'll spoon-feed you though because you appear slow: >>12702316

>>12702347
>would you actually bet money on BE-4 NOT making it to orbit before Raptor lands on Mars?
Yes.

>>12702430
absolutely kekworthy thrust per area density

OI YA FOOKIN MARZY BASTIDS

>>12702430
Reminds me of the Titans LR-87.

>>12702448
Maybe it is related to BL1 launch?

>>12702418
yikes sweaty

>>12702309
Last time this post wasn't appreciated enough. Good one.

>>12702202
Faggot, kill yourself on livestream

>>12700485
Never realized it but Starship is about as tall as New Glenn’s first stage.

>>12702430
Never going to orbit am I right fellow muskbros?

>>12702448
>we spider man now

>>12702463
apparently tony has mentioned a tri-core Vulcan. Would be a bit better. BE-4 isn't great at thrust/area though, yeah.

>>12702426
>even without the development of Q>1 fusion propulsion systems.
You'll still need fusion for power generation in the outer system because you can't ISRU fission fuels or use solar.

>>12702485
I have no idea how that’ll work because Vulcan has a TWR under 1 on its own

>>12702482
Bait hardwr

>>12702480
Glad to see you have an actual rebuttal. Oh, wait... You're another brain dead Elon cock sucker. MY BAD!

>>12702492
it really needs SRBs to do much of anything, yeah

>>12702448
>>12702485
there's nothing about a launch pad in that spot in the FAA docs so it's probably a launch support structure, or stuff for the crane that's been laying around in Boca Chica for months

I'm reading an old Earth Paperback Book like a Great Grampa and it claimed that the freshest crater on the Moon is hundreds of millions of years old.

How do they know that and is it still held as true?

>>12702448
>>12702485
overhead view

>>12702513
The Earth is hit daily by little rocks that burn up before making it to the ground so I would think they also hit the moon and leave little craters. Maybe they are just talking about craters over a certain size?

>>12702516

>>12702448
probably reinforced concrete meant to withstand shrapnel from a landing failure so whatever is inside (probably a tank) doesn't need to be rebuilt every time an SN comes in hot

>>12702379
lemme know if this helps

>>12702520
then there's this weird stand at the build site

>>12702502
What even is Vulcan Heavy? It’s not tricore Vulcan so what is it?

>>12702492
more SRBs

>>12702435
I literally said cylinders are the future my dude. They're just after Moon and Mars.
Kinda like how air travel came after the internal combustion engine.

>>12702528

>>12702521
this is a good idea

>>12702530
Based on payloads I'm thinking it's just super-cooled propellants.

>>12702448
That's SN20
>>12702430
>A FUCKING ELLIPSE LMAO
>>12702481
I think that graphic may be off scale, I remember the Starship Booster being taller than that

>>12702522
I get it now.
It's a very interesting idea. My only concern is whether or not it would really be more effective than just straight up Starship spam (not actually Starship specifically but just cheap spacecraft).
It's a shame we can't really do that on Mars, let alone Earth. Would be cool as fuck.

>>12702519
I would assume so but that seems good news for a moonbase to me. The book is only from 2012 so I expect its still factual.

>>12702544
everything about that graphic is completely wrong in every way, the creator didn't even attempt to draw thins to scale.

>>12702555
This is the best I could find

>>12702561
>2016 starship
If only it actually looked that nice.

>>12702202
Says the one thinking Hallucigenia was an alien...

Why does Europa Clipper launched by FH need that much time and gravity assist to get to Europa?

>>12702573
It’s my favorite design too but it’s too bad that the damn thing fell for the carbon composite meme

>>12702489
You could still ISRU fission fuels actually, it's just a bigger pain in the ass, you would definitely need high efficiency breeders with easily reprocessed fuels to pull that off. Molten salt shit.
I do think that fusion is actually pretty close to becoming reality by the way, and that it's already at a point where a sufficiently motivated organization could brute force a Q>5 reactor using modern tech if it was the only option for them. Ignoring the economic reasons for choosing a smaller design, if you have REBCO superconducting tape you can just build a 12 meter major radius torus and have a machine that generates a burning fusion plasma no problem (a burning plasma is a state which is achieved at a high enough Q factor that you no longer need to route any of the electrical energy your generating back into heating the plasma; it's where the fusion burn becomes self sustaining as long as you are keeping the fuel concentrations high enough and the magnets turned on). Design the magnets to split apart for maintenance, build the interior vessel to come out in one piece for replacement, and surround the vessel with a massive tank of liquid heavy water, liquid heavy methane, or just liquid deuterium, and you can produce enough tritium via thermalized neutron capture in deuterium nuclei to keep your reactor self sustaining on fuel consumption (assuming that you aren't targeting pure D-D fusion in the first place, but even if you are injecting a bit of tritium does make the total power output jump quite a bit so why not?).

>This is the supposedly amazing "Starship"

OH NO NO NO

>>12702573
>>12702582
Good news is that Starship may end up having landing legs looking like those on the ITS, but smaller. 18m starship may end up becoming a steel ITS.

>>12701978
based and slav pilled

>>12702573
Looks like shit imo

>>12702598
It’s beautiful

>>12702492
>I have no idea how that’ll work because Vulcan has a TWR under 1 on its own
Vulcan has a TWR greater than 1 with no boosters, what are you talking about.

>>12702598
Wow those new rings are CLEAN

>>12702598
KINO
I
N
O

w-what's he doing?!

>>12702645
Leaving the US, or dunking on the kremlin for not selling him rocket tech lol

>Blue Origin
>red tarps
wtf