/sci/ - Science & Math

/g/ here.
I'll do the logo.

>>12708395
wasn't there a /sci/ diy rocket group?

>>12708413
i didn't know about that, thank ya kindly. i'll search warosu for them later.

>>12708402
sweet, tho that would probably be one of the last steps considering how contingent everything else is. appreciate it, thx /g/angsta

>>12708395
What do we use the sat for?

>>12708466
For hijacking other sats

>>12708466
it'll be a vanity project, like most nano- satellite projects, because tiny satellites only last for about a year. even if we added observation- radio- capability, that's technically just vanity w/ extra steps, w/ more work and cost. tho it would be pdope to have a 4chan satellite sending images of something to /sci/ for a year

>>12708476
this too. potato launcher to find a

>>12708395
>i don't yet know any orbital mechanics.
Play kerbal

>>12708476
this too. a satellite to observe other satellites, equipt with a potato launcher

>>12708513
is this real? i've heard people say things like this but i've never played it

>>12708513
bought it. does the lack of n-body physics matter in the scheme of cubesat controls?

>>12708513
oops meant to just delete one of my replies. i saw a review that said, "authoritative intro to orbital mechanics" and i was sold. downloaded.

>>12708395
Undergraduate aerospace engineering student here, I can help design the launch vehicle

>>12708395
How would we get a satellite into orbit, make our own rocket or buy space on existing platform

>>12709631
i imagine an existing platform would cost too much unless we got ELaNa NASA sponsored like unis do. i saw a plebbit post from 10 years ago of someone estimating that a bare bones ~1lb satellite would cost 500-1000 USD to launch. i don't know if he was referring to existing space or including rocket cost in there. i'm no aerospace engineer, i was hoping someone here would appraise the situation.

is the rocket more difficult or trivial? i was thinking we would build a bare bones sat then decide if we want to add extra capability to it, how much that would weigh, how much added cost to launch it, in a cycle, until happiness is achieved also

It's easy cheaper and easier to buy space on an existing rocket than to try to build your own
spacex have a rideshare project that starts at a couple million dollars

>put a tiny little ion thruster on it
>suicide it into a Chinese space station

>>12710699
imagine the butthurt

>>12710699

>>12710699
.

Is there some way that we could use it to depressurize the ISS?

Great idea indeed! But we didn’t think about the purpose of said satellite. Would we get special autonomous wireless network, which is not connected to Internet?

>>12710626
Is it really? So you have a ballpark idea for how much both of those options would cost? Do they even allow ~1-5lb satellites?

>>12710795
im just trying to take yotsuba to space i dont want to destroy planet earth

>>12710818
jaysus

>>12710836
see >>12708506
as far as i can tell almost all nano- pico- satellites are totally useless because they last anywhere from days to months. any time they have a stated purpose that purpose is just for the sake of giving it a purpose.

we could definitely do something tho but i have no idea how much weight/cost/performance these features would add

>>12708402
kek

I like the idea, it sounds like a lot of work, but it does sound cool. We should use it to take pictures of something.

>>12712364
>you have a ballpark idea for how much both of those options would cost?
yes. building your own rocket from scratch costs about $600 million dollars if you're Elon Musk and his team of super geniuses, and a couple of billion USD if you're not
buying a dedicated launch on a Rocket Lab Electron would cost $7.5 million US, and you could possible rideshare it (like Gabe Newell did when he put a Gnome Chompsky into orbit) for much less, but this requires networking with people who are already planning on buying an Electron launch
a rideshare on Falcon 9 is much cheaper, especially if you can buy space on one of the sub-rideshares on the rideshares (for example, people have been putting ash from corpses into space)
here's the appropriate links for more information

https://shop.rocketlabusa.com/collections/caps/products/gold-mission-success-coin-dedicated-mission
https://www.spacex.com/rideshare/index.html

>>12712386
but i'm obviously not referring here to building a partially reusable 12,500kg rocket with a 500lb payload just to send a single 1 lb satellite into space. it would cost orders of magnitude less simply by virtue of the fact that it doesn't need to be reusable and has an (orders of magnitude) smaller payload. my asking is obviously about the options that seem to me to be either build our own (to launch a ~1-3lb satellite into orbit) OR pay for existing space; do you have any ballparks on how much either of these would cost? also i doubt that spacex is even remotely the most efficient way to do this

>>12708402
kek
>>12708441
He doesn't know

>>12714451
did i fall for the blunder? what's /g/'s logo? terry davis? what did i miss?

>>12714179
That's factored in

MSc Space Systems Engineering with satellite DSP and power systems experience here. I'll happily help with what I can. I can do basic MA using GMAT also. Get a telegram or irc or something going?

>>12715453
mind giving more details?
>$600M if i am elon with team of super geniuses
$600M dollars to build a throwaway rocket to get a 1lb payload into low earth orbit? how? Falcon 1 was estimate by Elon to have been $90M to develop and that has a 180kg payload that has a possibly resuable first stage. that whole thing seems way overengineered in every aspect when the goal here is "fuck everything i just want to get a rock into low earth orbit". also is the vanguard not a 10lb payload rocket that was built on the order of 10s of millions of dollars in the mid 1950s? is the technology there a mystery? which parts of it are the most expensive? what reason is there for that not to be significantly cheaper today?
>dedicated launch on electron $7.5M
well there would be no logical reason for us to buy a dedicated launch anyway

>>12715681
>MSc Space Systems Engineering with satellite DSP and power systems experience
amazing. i was planning on making another thread in the future with more details if enough people responded here. i really should just make one now tho but i've been trying to figure out how complicated this really is on a scale of TempleOS to Need A Team Of Experienced Engineers And Hundreds Of Millions Of Dollars, and the internet keeps suggesting the latter but i don't see why

Interdasted, but mathfag

>>12708402
Not realising it's already been made years ago

>>12709695
You can get a tubesat which = 0.5 cube for about. $12,000

>>12716925
>>12716925
That's outdated. The whole kekistan bullshit is dead (finally) and shouldn't be represented

>>12708476
This - 4chan commits the first act of space piracy by hijacking another satellite and using it to transmit memes.

>>12716678
Falcon 1 was not possibly reusable and they already had an engine basically
I just looked it up and wikipedia is claiming that Rocket Lab developed their rocket for about $100 million, so I guess I was off by an order of magnitude
still cheaper to buy a rideshare on a Falcon 9

>>12716678
okay bro here's my final take for you
>building your own orbital rocket:
Need A Team Of Experienced Engineers And Hundreds Of Millions Of Dollars

>building a meme nanosat and launching it into space on a rideshare satellite on a SpaceX rideshare rocket
TempleOS tier

>>12717089
>Falcon 1 was not possibly reusable
i very clearly didnt say "falcon 1 was possibly reusable", i said it's first stage was possibly reusable. this was apparently originally part of the plan but we didn't see this or not this

>still cheaper to buy a rideshare on a Falcon 9
seems like it but that still doesn't seem so obvious to me. what are the main costs and challenges here? rocket fuel isn't expensive is it? classical control theory is stupid and primitive. and the satellite itself could literally just be a rock with yotsuba painted on it. there's way way way more i'm missing here i know, but that's my question

>>12717097
>building your own orbital rocket
is there a holistic textbook for this topic? i played the kerbal tutorials like someone suggested...

there must be massive technical challenges to even building a single throwaway rocket whose sole purpose is to bring a tiny satellite to orbit and i'm curious what they are

>>12717226
1. engines r hard
2. just building something light enough
3. staging and lighting an engine in zero g
4. control is actually hard

rocket fuel can be dirt cheap if you use cryo methane or propane and oxygen

I just don't think it's possible to build a "cheap throwaway DIY orbital rocket" because I've been watching teams of experienced professional engineers from all over the world try and fail to build orbital rockets for a while now. Go look up the story of Astra, they're basically trying to do what you're suggesting (proving that you can do this unlocks infinite government gibs). They started operations in 2004 and blew up their first few orbital attempts in 2018, and only just now managed to get one to not explode (they didn't make it to orbit despite the whole thing working flawlessly)

there are a few more well-funded names and a few scams in the big list of people who are currently failing to get to orbit, let me go find it

>>12717226
here's the list of people who are trying and failing
none of the Chinese ones count, they just bought their rockets from the military and as soon as they proved they could really do it, the Chinese military shut them down

>>12717314
oh, and here's the list as it was first made in 2016
notice how none of these people were successful and none of them are still on the list?

>>12717292
>proving that you can do this unlocks infinite government gibs
i see i thought maybe it was just a matter of there being no reason to bother trying to send a small satellite into space as its own end but it's the opposite. i was dumb but now i know better

>staging and lighting an engine in zero g
o
>control is actually hard
i was skeptical until i saw that the solution here was to build more engines for finer and finer adjustments of attitude control. but other than that do you even absolutely need a sort of inverted pendulum control to keep all rockets upright? they can just do that themselves right?

>>12717314
>>12717319
welp. TAXI

>>12716678
If myself and a group of fellow students could qualify and launch a cubesat, a bunch of autists on here absolutely could. As many have said, developing a launch vehicle is absolutely not necessary; unless the mission requirements call for a novel, hobbyist LV.
Speaking of, what is the Mission - earth observation, deep space, telecoms? This drives EVERYTHING (payload, mission analysis, LV requirements, structures, power systems, thermal systems etc.). It's all speculation without having Mission Aim(s) and Objectives.
Get something going if you're serious about this - I'd love to get involved. Discord, Telegram, carrier pigeon, whatever

>>12717827
>peaking of, what is the Mission - earth observation, deep space, telecoms? This drives EVERYTHING (payload, mission analysis, LV requirements, structures, power systems, thermal systems etc.). It's all speculation without having Mission Aim(s) and Objectives.
Even though this is so stupidly obvious it genuinely did not occur to me that if my goal was literally just Send Yotsuba To Space then it's just a matter of painting a rock and buying space on a rocket. So all these >>12717319
people want to get satellites into space, is the main lucrative drive here earth observation? Or satellite internet access? And what is generally the mission for the average university cubesat team? I just want to get 4ch's yotsuba into space while also learning and applying something related to satellite control systems in the process. It does seem there is interest, or could be, but I'm still hesitant to make a Discord for this particular thread due to how clearly naive I am on every aspect of this. Being an imposter dipshit from an American Satellite Building Forum, it seems cringe of me to start a "satellite building" discord given how clueless I am about almost everything involved here. picrelated

>>12708395
Would be great. Indeed.

>>12717827
I say we start small, send a radio frequency jammer into orbit.
Return to monke

>>12718883
the issue here is that if we plan to buy space on someone else's rocket, there is no way we are going to sneak an rf jammer onto it. if we have something remote access on it that has that capability and we don't get found out we will all eventually go to prison literally right next to ted kaszinski's cell

then we will truly be returning to monke

>>12709695
Making your own rocket is extremely difficult. If you cannot make your own car then I doubt you can make a rocket that travels thousands of kilometers per hour.

>>12718015
I mean the power of weaponized autism is underrated. If some /sci/ autist managed to solve a decades-long math conjecture I'm sure we can hitch a ride on a Falcon 9

>>12719131
>If you cannot make your own car then I doubt you can make a rocket that travels thousands of kilometers per hour.
plenty of inbreds or boomers can take cars apart and put them back together. making one from scratch and passing safety regulations is another issue

>>12719200
tru

spacebro when will we finally colonize moon?

>>12720307
i bet the moon is going to get reliable internet before i do

>>12708395
use a balloon and then use a rocket to get the right of the way

>>12722620
duly noted

calling all space autists! i made a disc! for the time being this is simply going to be a general 4ch satellite club, for autists interested in satellites. as opposed to a dedicated building team. because i'm currently clueless and am going to need to read up on this subject... and who knows if anybody else is going to join? this club will be great for anybody with stem experience that is also interested in learning how to launch trash into LEO.
https://discord.gg/Vd3NqjFZ
we have officially entered Stage Zero: Dreams of Space Yotsuba. will we ever move past this stage? if nobody joins i'm still going to make another sat thread in a week or two with another link to this disc.