/sci/ - Science & Math

Real thread:
>>14806848

>>14806848

>>14806848

>>14806848

>>14806855
FTS Archive
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KCJBL632oieD1r6JOh_5Eg9NTcf_-hH8?usp=sharing

>>14806881
Fake and gay

>>14806881
>CCP cartoons
No thanks

I support this thread

>>14806920
I support the Solar Moth

Where is he now?

Sfg, what the fuck even happened with the sls scrub? Tell me what to think about this, armchair rocket engineers lend me your expertise please!

>>14806930
>Wasn't given funeral
>No known grave site
He is probably haunting the descendants of his late wife. That man was robbed of the Nobel Prize since they didn't recognize astrophysics.

>>14806855
>3 more days for Artemis 1
If it delays again i WILL buy a .22, fly to the USA and poke a hole in the tank

L U N A R
U
N
A
R

M O R T A R
O
R
T
A
R

All the hype for Ess Ell Ess and poof, gone and forgotten already lmao

>Energia is half the size of SLS and literally doesn't have an upper stage at all yet has a higher payload to TLI
What in the actual fuck went wrong with SLS?

So did a static fire of starship happen when I was asleep or not?

>>14807036
The fierce, brutal, and unforgiving power of hyddrologgs

>>14807036
It was made by "Foundational Black Americans," whatever the fuck those are.

>>14807036
congress

>>14806939

Hydrogen leak in the 3rd engine and some other small shit.

These things never go on the first try but because it was the Moon Rocket I went anyway and got a good seat. We also saw this guy.

t. Titusville FL resident, 5th generation FL native

it would have worked

>>14807064
No it wouldn't have, it's a very dumb idea

>>14807063
And from what board did you come flying in with your reddit spacing and namefagging, xir?

https://twitter.com/bocachicagal/status/1564581905256914945 (embed)
>Potential static fire attempt today
Light this candle already and lets get to orbit

>>14807036
FEEL THE POWER OF MY HYDROLOGS

>>14807092

/p/

>>14807106
You are forgiven, but get rid of the name and trip here

>>14807107

Fuck sorry I've been awake for like 5 minutes and popped in here to see if there were any SLS updates from anon, carry on gentlemen

>>14806885

The Shuttle is viable for military use (5.4.1981)

The American Space Shuttle, which is set to launch next week, may be very important in defending American spy and communication satellites from Soviet destroyer satellites, officials from the US ministry of defense say.
Part of the US space and aeronautics administration NASA's officials are worried that the new Space Shuttle will be taken from NASA's custody, and the defense ministry Pentagon will swallow it.
The Space Shuttle will first be used to run tests regarding satellite defense, laser weaponry, and space based spying. The Shuttle is roughly the size of a DC-9 airplane.
On Saturday the Soviet news correspondent Tass said that the United States is trying to reach a military force in space, "which they do not hold on Earth", with their Space Shuttle. A large part of the Space Shuttle program is devoted to military purposes, Tass said.
Tass also said that the attempt to gain a military majority in space is bound to fail, and in addition that the Soviet Union has never been left behind the United States in military might.

>>14806564
If I'm holding a bunch of rocks in my arms while floating in free space, and I toss them all away from me in the same direction will I travel in the opposite direction?

Or if 1000 people are standing grouped together on a platform, floating in free space, and they start jumping up, 10 at a time, will the platform be moving in the opposite direction?

>>14806939
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/oNB54oP7zGk

they didn't test something and gambled it would work during the launch attempt
it didn't

>>14807162
Yes and yes.
In the first one the rock will impart its mass' worth of energy, which will move you far less than you move the rock.

>>14806855
based thread

>>14806881
cringe

>>14806881
>pruned
Based

>>14806881
/sfg/bros... the newfags won

>>14807205
So they did, have fun in your thread which is just that one guy reposting the same collages and off-topic shuttle pics over and over again, here's one more oldfag leaving.

>>14807207
See you soon when Starship launches

new
https://youtu.be/vVLK0tgLHro

>>14807205
>newfags
>thread doesn't even have the edition in the thread name

>>14807207
>off-topic shuttle pics
Uh that's me, I've been off my main PC for a while

>>14807213
>desperately grasping at straws
That happens all the time.

>>14807199
*cough*

>>14807205
>>14807207

>>14807218
>he doesn't know
>he is clueless
lurk moar

>>14807224
The only way you could think not having the edition in the subject was some smoking gun was if you got here earlier this week.

>the thread
>something about it
could it be n'wahs?

Thread shape: suboptimal

>>14807227
Always has been

>14807226
>still has no idea
bet you don't even know who history Anon was

>>14807235
squid girl is a cute. CUTE

would it have worked?

>>14807241
well it didn't, much to Goddard's chagrin

>>14807245
he just needed better internal guidance system

New Hazegrayart kino

https://youtu.be/vVLK0tgLHro

>>14807241
>>14807245

>Robert Truax...stunned Robert Goddard, who watched gob-smacked as he demonstrated a fully throttle-able and restart-able pressure-fed, nitric acid/aniline rocket engine
https://www.oldrocketforum.com/showpost.php?p=263190&postcount=5

Would Sea Dragon have worked?

>>14807300
opinions differ, Tom Mueller reckons the combustion instability objection is false

>>14807305
Probably. But what about literally sitting in seawater for days on end?

>>14807307
eeh boats do it for much longer before it becomes an issue and you can launch from freshwater lakes if you want
Some Norwegians tried to build a mini-SD but they went bust
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45364.0

>>14807305
>me and the boys on our pleasure cruise in the methane seas of Titan
>don't have to imagine the smell anymore

>>14807300
>>14807318

How would you deal with relatively warm water heating your liquid oxygen and hydrogen? Water is a vastly better conductor of heat than air

My battery is low and it's getting dark

>>14807349
in the tanks? thanks to square/cube insulation shouldn't bee to big of an overall hit

I haven't been home or online the last two days, what are some SLS news that I couldn't get from MSM? Why did the engine not work

>>14807063
>he's wearing a kilt
incredibly based

>>14807356
Engine chill valve wouldn't work, engine would've melted on ignition.
I guess it's better that they tested it at T-40 minutes rather than around T-10 seconds were they usually would've opened the valves

What would you say the American version of the R-7 is/was?
It’s funny how the USSR really only ever flew R-7 derivatives and the Proton family until the 80’s. Meanwhile the US had Atlas, Thor/Delta, Titan, Saturn, Jupiter, etc

>>14807217
i don't like the Shuttle but I do like some of the pics of it they took

>>14806939
Engineers attempted to flow a small amount of cryogenic fuel through the plumbing to chill it to operating temperature. SpaceX engineers do this too and you'll usually hear "MVac chill has started" as a call out on the streams. NASA managed to get three of the four bleed valves open, but the fourth valve on engine #3 wouldn't open. If you don't chill your engine there is both a risk of thermally shocking the material and flash boiling the very very cold propellants in a place that is less than desirable.

>>14807366
I'd say Atlas or Delta, both have their roots in the earliest days of the space race, although neither are as close to the original as the R-7 is

>>14807367
Fucking cracker didn't put that hat in the window by accident

>persian gulf war = first space war
>ukraine war = first commercial space war
first real space war when?

>>14807363
>engine would've melted on ignition.
Stop talking about things you have no idea about.

>>14807375
Couldn't they just send a guy with a bucket to manually chill the engine?

>>14807399
its not that easy in thermometry

>>14807402
>SRBs on SRBs
SRB military autism set US' space program back countless decades

>>14807399
A bucket of liquid hydrogen?

>>14807407
False

>>14807407
but muh throooost

>>14807412
Lovely looking rocket, would enjoy looking at it more if I knew the boosters were RTLS reusable

>>14807402
they should have tried building a two stage rocket that's just bigger instead of going with this autism.

>>14807391
Thermal shock would've destroyed the copper piping inside the engine walls. The engine would've melted after the liquid hydrogen escapes through the now open copper pipes, causing the engine bell's outer layer to crack, warp, or even melt

>>14807412
Titan-Centaur is one of my favorite launchers, but I'm still going to shit on solids. Their characteristics do not align best with space programs.

>>14807375
>The Wet Dress Rehearsal did not complete all of its assigned tests, including the engine chill down activity. This test was started but stopped because of a liquid hydrogen leak. Instead of isolating and mitigating the problem and continuing the chill down test, they wrote a procedure into the launch terminal count to bypass the actual test, assuming there would be no problems with the engine chill. Had they actually performed the test that was originally required, it is likely the problem with engine #3 would have shown itself so that it could have been fixed before launch day. Another egg-in-the-face moment for NASA management.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=57014.msg2401953#msg2401953

Riddle me this /sfg/, SRBs cases already need to sustain the full pressure of the combustion chamber, why not just make the entire thing a pressure fed liquid fueled booster. They would be cheaper because the fuel is cheaper and the engine is trivial, and because they are highly throttleable they could land.

>>14807425
This is such a stupid argument. There are many flaky tests in engineering. Sometimes you should just bypass them. If you aim for perfection, then you will never launch.
SpaceX does the same thing.
Only egg-in-the-face moment is that a 76 year old is shitposting on a roleplaying forum instead of enjoying his retirement.

>>14807432
but then it can't be used as a nuclear missile and defense contractors would be sad :( pls understand

>>14807436
>retirement
wait, would lower gravity benefit retirees? imagine the moon becoming the new florida.

http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2011/ph240/nguyen1/docs/SSME_PRESENTATION.pdf
extensive pdf about SSME

>>14807432
jerbs program

>>14807432
>if a rocket can do something, why not just use something completely different?

>>14807450
ok but the man has a point

>>14807366
>It’s funny how the USSR really only ever flew R-7 derivatives and the Proton family until the 80’s
Retard, they had other launch vehicle families as well.

Just look up shit like the Tsyklon family, has like 300 launches

>>14807432
I have no idea about this subject but I'm fairly sure the pressure differential between the two designs is significant and SRBs cases would not sustain the prolonged pressure at all. Most of them are designed to combust and direct that exhaust out with specific shapes and patterns that slightly change the burn time

>>14807453
In some cases. Most of the LRB proposals for the shuttle are counterproductive since they’re more hydrolox and would make the “foam dandruff strikes fragile heat shield” issues even worse than they already were.

>>14807461
ok yeah that's fair, I forgot how cursed shuttle-adjacent rocketry is

>>14807455
Not to mention the Kosmos family, second most launched rocket family ever iirc.

>>14807440
It would reduce strain on things like worn out knees, hips and other joints.
BO showed you can strap geriatrics into a rocket and they will make it out alive just fine.

>>14806972
>>14806979
>>14807199
>>14807217
>>14807228

You like spaceplanes, don't you /sfg/?

>>14807486
only one

>>14806927
As a sense of scale, the full spacecraft and furled mirrors for this design were supposed to fill a Shuttle payload bay.

>>14807036
RD-170 boosters instead of solids made one hell of a difference.

>>14807486
that's just one autist

>>14806855
Any mews on Astra since the last launch?

>>14807513
They're going to be delisted from NASDAQ before they launch at this rate.

>>14807513
They’re contracted to build ion engines for OneWeb

>>14807556
what's the purpose of the drilling bits in the combustion chamber

>>14807538
kek

>>14807556
looks like a blob monster with two chicks

Some redditor got an Astra tattoo lol

>>14807570
Imagine looking at your arm 40 years later and seeing that? Or how autistic it must be to explain what it means

>>14807486
I think with the right engine technology they'll have a niche, but not right now. We're still operating in an industry where most vehicles aren't reusable yet and current and immediate-future engines are still too inefficient to allow for anything but maximally weight optimized designs. As rogguettes get bigger and engines get more efficient (consider rotating detonation engines, 25% greater efficiency) there will be more wiggle room for including wings or creating more complex blended lifting body designs.
Until then though, two-stage, self-landing rockets burning a subchilled fuel and pure LOX with minimal aerosurfaces will probably be as efficient as can be reasonably achieved for everything except very specialized needs.

>>14807491
They could have demonstrated this for a fraction of the cost of the NERVA program but it just doesn't have the same appeal to the government and members of the autistic community. That is just the depressing fate of solar thermal, at least laser thermal is so great that it probably won't be passed up.

I think we should start a counter-oldspace propaganda campaign by convincing normies and ecofags that single-use rockets are polluting the oceans by damaging reefs/killing fish/leaking chemicals. It's 2022 after all, they need to keep up with the times

>>14807486

Starship will never be human rated.

>>14807584
Nah, ecofags and envirotards should be held away from spaceflight at all costs, they've already fucked up commuting, mass transit, and agriculture with their extreme level of mental disability.

>>14807580
I read the original 1970s papers linked from the solar moth section on Atomic Rockets. The implication is it basically got shelved for Shuttle-Centaur because it was too low thrust to do impulsive burns properly which made it worse than Shuttle-Centaur for everything but interplanetary or moon tug work. Solar PV fed orbital laser thermal would be ridiculously OP for the inner system.

>>14807384
The final Taiwan crisis.
If the US wants to break up a Chinese blockade of Taiwan they will need to neutralise or degrade Chinese reconnaissance and communications sats.

>>14807586
neither will any chinese spacecraft

>>14807584
ecofags should be exterminated, not given more ammo
the fact that they're gibbering goycattle and can be lured by the nose to anything by anyone with shekels to throw around just makes it worse

>>14807614

>>14807584
That's a losing battle. The whole point of reusability is a huge increase in annual upmass. That means lots of more propellant burned and in the case of Starlink a lot more mass coming down eventually too.

mogged

why not just make an updated saturn v?

When is the next space shuttle launch?

>>14807630
>Starlink
Those are designed to burn up outside the environment where they don't kill fish or reefs.

>>14807677
didn't know foam could get turbulence

imagine peacefully swimming in your LOX tank when suddenly you get pulled into a turbine

>>14807556
anyone has the picture of various engines designed by a single department?

>>14807677
two weeks

>>14807715

>>14806980
just use a spacesuit fuck the tin can
you still can use robots and robot arms, but why on earth (pun intended) would you want to sit _in_ it?

>>14807680
Eww, reusing rockets is like reusing condoms

>>14807727
>rocket exhaust= -50 F
based
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smswUgtMTfA

>>14807733
>just use a spacesuit

So is there a /sfg/ approved sci fi movie&show list?

>>14807727
Raptor is almost exactly halfway between Turbomachinery and Manufacturing

>>14807747
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Cops
>Star Cops is set in the year 2027—some 40 years into the future at time of broadcast—a time in which space travel has become common and mankind is in the process of exploiting and colonising the Solar System. There are five permanently occupied space stations orbiting the Earth and there are bases on the Moon and Mars. Approximately 3,000 people are living and working in space.[3] This near future setting was influenced by the potential for greater access to space promised by the burgeoning Space Shuttle programme and by the militarisation of space through the US Government's Strategic Defense Initiative programme (also known as "Star Wars") both of which were underway in the early 1980s.[4] Accordingly, space travel and life in space is portrayed in a realistic manner with depictions of weightlessness and low gravity environments and lengthy space journeys (months or years in cases of interplanetary travel)[3] as well as hazards such as spacesuit failures,[5] radiation exposure[6] and explosive decompression
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpeldoEzg2U

>>14807727
thanks fren

>>14807747
Event Horizon

>>14807747
Planetes

>>14807746
a gay in a tin can would suffer the same.
you bump into the suit/pod or the suit/pod bumps into you. shit will stay heavy and there is only so much padding you can do

>>14807747
Prequel trilogy

>>14807747
For All Mankind

>>14807747
Star Wars Episode IV, V, VI
The Clone Wars tv show
Star Wars Episode VII, VIII, IX
The Mandalorian (Disney +)
Star Wars Rebels
Obi Wan Kenobi
The Book of Boba Fett
Star Wars Episode I, II, III
Rogue One: a star wars story
Star Wars the Bad Batch
Solo: a Star wars Story

All of these in any order

>>14807763
>For All Mankind
I find the premise of the show so stupid, the US would have been all like "fuck you, we are going to mars instead" if the russians ever made it first to the moon.

>>14807770
"We can still win the race for the base." It's spelled out explicitly in dialogue.

>>14807747
I remember Sunshine being good but little else so I can't vouch for the science behind it.

>>14807774
Sunshine is a fantastic 90-minute film trapped inside a mediocre 110-minute film.

>>14807747
God I miss that show, at least it went out quietly instead of being kept reanimated and butchered like Star Trek

>>14807747
Gravity and Interstellar are best in the realism category.

>>14807747
The hitchhiker’s guide to the galaxy

>>14807793
>Gravity
oh no no no

>>14807770
Mars is an order of magnitude more difficult than Moon landings. Even if NASA maintained Apollo tier excellence & more $$$, Mars landings would have taken place in the mid 80s, no earlier

>>14807789
I guess you didn't hear the latest news.
Amazon owns the stargate IP now, and you can be sure as hell that they are going to milk it for everything it's worth.

>>14807799
Oh for FUCK sake

>>14807798
They were a lot closer then you think, von braun made the saturn 5 for missions to mars.

>No one brought up the Martian
Wow, /sfg/ really is healing

>>14807794
Gravity was not realistic whatsoever. That scene where they were held on by the tether and the guy had to let go so he wouldn’t make them too heavy was so lol bad, plus the parachute deploying in the vacuum of space, or being able to EVA to the Chinese space station from the ISS

Interstellar gets a pass just because of how perfect the writing is, but that doesn’t excuse the lazy choice of using a Saturn 5 as a launch vehicle for their magic futuristic SSTO spacecraft

>>14807793
Gravity is to orbital mechanics as The Core is to geology.

>>14807794
Meant to reply to>>14807793

>>14807806
no 2001: A Space Odyssey or 2010: The Year We Make Contact either

>>14807747
Farscape is a definite go watch.
>Farscape-1 that crichton uses was an actual experimental re-entry craft that NASA had designed
>Bioships like Moya
>Military generation 'command' ships used by the peacekeepers to keep entire armies permanently mobilised
>Wormhole travel and other FTL designs

>>14807538
Not exactly, they were selected to "supply engines for integration into the porfolio of Arrow commercial small satellites manufactured by Airbus OneWeb Satellites".

So the company that makes the OneWeb satellites, among others, placed Astra on their "approved suppliers list". That doesn't necessarily means that they will be buying engines from Astra, just that they could.

>>14807747
Outland is extremely cool 80s aesthetic, cop movie set on Io

>>14807806
No ad astra too, fuck that movie, what where they thinking.

Gravity and Interstellar aren't very realistic in the absolute sense but they still beat the other movies by a long shot

>>14807805
I disagree, there were just too many unknowns for a mission in the 70's. No one had spent more than 2 weeks in freefall, no good data on Martian surface conditions etc. Interplanetary is a new ball game that they would have had to build capabilities up for. A free return fly by to shake down the systems would have been necessary and there are only so many synods in a given decade. Mid 80s to be reasonably sure of getting your crew there and back alive.

The NASA simps in Berger's twitter replies are really incredible.

>>14807747
the expanse
legend of the galactic heroes
dunc

>>14807806
its a fun watch fuck the haters

>>14807766
and I thought based opinions werent allowed on /sfg/

>>14807819
>badmouthing 2010: The Year We Make Contact
its the first demonstration of aerocapture in a film you fag

>>14807830
To be fair, there was the Manned Venus Flyby plan, which was pre-Apollo 11. Would've been pretty cool, assuming it wasn't a one-way trip.

>>14807832
what are the retards saying?

>>14807830
Maybe, but we wil never know how a mars mission planned by von braun would look like.

>a fucking shoe

>>14807853
are they ever gonna actually put it together? it's been an empty shell for 3 years

>>14807853
>Falling for the non-inflatable space"plane" meme

looks like spacex arent the only ones planning a fuel depot

Orbit Fab announces in-space hydrazine refueling service
>hydrazine for satellites in geostationary orbit as soon as 2025 at a price of $20 million
>refueling services for GEO spacecraft using a depot and “fuel shuttle” spacecraft
>the depot will also be able to support spacecraft such as servicing vehicles that can travel to the depot for “self-service” refueling
https://spacenews.com/orbit-fab-announces-in-space-hydrazine-refueling-service/

>>14807828
The cinematography and CG was absolutely fantastic, especially when they were out in Neptune's orbit, such a shame that the writing and the narration was so completely fucking boring and nonsensical, maybe the biggest wasted potential I've ever seen on such a good budget sci-fi movie

>>14807853
Ay yo, new jordans sheeeeit we space bruthas now

>>14807861
I think it was trying to be Apocalypse Now (or more to the point, Heart of Darkness) but it fell pretty flat to me. Maybe I should give it another try.

>>14807567
I see it

>>14807848
yeah that's the interplanetary testing phase, first Venus, because its a shorter mission , then a Mars flyby. if all goes well on those and you've sent umpteen probes to Mars to get a good idea of the place then manned landing is within your reach

>>14807595
>everything but interplanetary or moon tug work
soo, everything that's not LEO

>>14807747
For what they did with a budget of less than $4million, this hidden gem is one of my absolute favourites

>>14807794
the BBC cheapo version >>> gay aughts flick

>>14807883
Looks like it's on Hulu. Worth a watch, huh?

>>14807897
yes
soundtrack is great

>>14807873
Nah, the way he goes all that way only for his dad to go full retard over "there's no other alien life, we're all alone omg everything is so pointless might as well an hero" just completely ruins it for me

>>14807747
Battlestar Galactica

>>14807897
It's a bit slow to start but the world building is great, they set up a cool environment without really saying much, then later you get really invested in the main roles too

>>14807747
I suppose the popular ones got mentioned already
now for the truly obscure retro ones:
>Saturn 3
>Space 1999
>Ikarie XB 1
>Capricorn 1
>Europa Report
>The Big Space Travel
>Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise

>>14807905
Will space movies EVER get explosions right

EARTHER (derogatory)

>>14807747
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Zero_Two
>The film takes place on the Moon in the year 2021. A former-astronaut-turned-salvager, Bill Kemp, helps a millionaire space industrialist capture a 6000-tonne sapphire asteroid, while also helping a woman find her brother, a missing miner/prospector.
>Two denizens of this rough-and-tumble lunar society are the notorious millionaire J.J. Hubbard and former-astronaut-turned-satellite-salvager Bill Kemp, the first man to set foot on Mars. He left Space Corporation because he wants to explore space, while his former employer only wants to operate commercial passenger flights to and from Mars and Venus.

its first film I know of where spaceflight is centred around commerce rather than national prestige, scientific exploration etc.

>>14807926
https://youtu.be/a3lcGnMhvsA

>>14807905
You just know the new reboot is going to be bad.

>>14807860
>hydrazine depot
Interesting idea but a declining market opportunity since solar electric propulsion can easily reach GEO with enough propellant for many decades of station-keeping.

>>14807905
coolest stellar system ever

>>14807940
A lot of times you don't want to wait many months to get your satellite into GEO

>>14807947
is such a system even possible

>>14807939
yeah
could you believe them turned Starbuck into a woman?

I liked First Man

>>14807949
Then pay hundreds of millions more to get the equivalent payload there using chemical and have your lunch eaten by a new space competitor.

>>14807957
Talking about the reboot that they are making right now.

>>14807953
its a bit of a stretch but imagine the incentive to develop space travel there

>>14807947
>lol Virgon

>>14807963
so are they turning Starbuck into sassy black woman or what?

>>14807984
I don't think they're doing anything. There's been chatter about another Battlestar Galactica for years, but I don't think anything's ever actually gone into development. Not sure tho.

>>14807959
Did Damien Chazelle ever actually accept Maezwa san's offer to join and film DearMoon?

>>14807963
Rebooting BSG. For what purpose? I guess there have been a lot of Sci-Fi series launched lately. So there must be money to be made too.

>>14807987
not yet

>>14807986
The chink flu pushed back the development.

>>14807989
Because we now have dozens of streaming services with little to no content, so thats why they are looking at so many older shows to reboot.

Rip Gorby, may you have all the Pizza hut you can eat in the next life

>>14807486

>>14808010
11/10 SSTO
Would bang.

Feels good to be back

>>14807747
The Apollo 11 documentary, and When We Left Earth mini series.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLRdsjeqsVA

>>14808017
SSTOs are dumb as hell for Earth, but we should build them anyway because they look cool.

>>14808007

>>14808010
tail fin looks extremely good

>>14808048
i wouldn't go that far, some concepts for them are actually pretty good in terms of mass fraction devoted to cargo compared to fuel. and given their simplicity you could get a higher launch cadence with them than with a tsto rocket system. the conventional gliding landing profile is also a huge plus.
i have a feeling getting starship human rated is going ot be a pain in the ass given that gnarly landing maneuver.

>>14808076
> big wings
unaesthetic, reduce them pls

>>14808048
I blame the popularity of KSP among young nerds.

>>14808084
>reduce them pls

>>14808048
hngggggg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVLK0tgLHro
good ol hazegreyart

>>14807761
Then put a straight in the can instead.
Fucking dumbass diversity shits ruining the space program.

What the fuck is wrong with Starship now? SpaceX can’t even static fire them anymore. Every damn day they either fill up the tank then blue ball us or just plane cancel the road closure.

>>14808115
no clue. it's possible that starship is a dud concept and they're running into fundamental problems with system integration and workability. i think that's unlikely and this is all just very normal development delays-overall i'd say they're doing fine on total dev time given how hard this whole project is, but it has slipped a few years at this point. mars really looks like an early to mid 2030s goal at this point, i don't see it happening in even the late 2020s

>>14808048
You joke but that's exactly what will happen. Building an SSTO is a massive flex for any company/country even if two stage fully reusable is better in literally every practical application. The space shuttle had similar reasoning.

>>14808123
Tbh I feel like once Starship is flying regularly stuff like Mars will be easy (ISRU and whatnot aside). These first few Starship flights will 100% be fuckhard

>>14808123
2020s manned landing was never credible, Musk fabulates all the time like issuing pictures of chemically driven rockets hanging out at Saturn

>>14808082
The mass fractions are dogshit. No matter how good it is, any SSTO's up mass can be dramatically improved by adding another stage. The sole purpose for having an SSTO spaceplane is to have pictures of it flying in formation with warbirds and fighter jets. That's it. That said, I really want to see an orbital behemoth get escorted back to Cape Canaveral by a flight of P-38's, so we should piss the money away on it anyway.

>>14807770
That's literally what happens in the show

SSTO spaceplane bad
Air refuelling spaceplane good

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzswGOA8wOs
the most aesthetic plume of them all

>>14808136
I'll be the spacefag who confesses that I'm pretty skeptical that Starship will ever successfully fly. I'm not an aerospace engineer, but the thing just doesn't sit right with me. It's both too simple and too hellishly complex for me to accept as plausible.

Then again, I would've said the same thing about the space shuttle if I hadn't been eight at the time.

Is this relativity’s Terran 1 payload system?
https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1564729885838524423?s=21&t=KABKncSQONT3B2DmPKT2uA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxa83eTgc0E
>here are my engines, jeff

>>14808128
>>14808138
In theory an SSTO could be useful for warfare since it would only need to be refueled rather than reassembled after landing and would have better maneuverability within the atmosphere while being able to launch and land in far more places. Having a spaceship that can take off and land at any decently large airport and doesn't need to be reassembled on specialized sites is a rather mundane but potentially critical advantage. I would bet money that any American SSTO program will be pushed primarily by the Air Force and/or Space Force, even if it's ostensibly designed for payload to orbit or to flex. Russia and China would be the same but even less transparent about it.

That's not to say it will ever be worth it to build, but I can easily see generals masturbating over it since even one or two functional SSTOs could be a huge tactical asset.

https://twitter.com/Morgan628/status/1562623766512840705
>Not a coincidence. The Starship HLS airlocks are designed to be emergency cabins that the entire mission can be completed from if the main cabin is compromised. The astronauts could literally fly back to Orion with a tablet while sitting in the airlock.

Artemis I breifing starting soon

>>14808194
Yeah, the ability to put a company of Marines on the ground anywhere on the planet within 24 hours has been the holy grail of the DoD since the age of sail.

>>14808208
Starting now it looks like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BpRN5BiQxo

They are now targeting Saturday 2:17 pm for a launch attempt

>>14808247
0% chance of that happening

>>14808251
Why?

Royal Caribbean to use starlink on all cruise ships

>>14808263
SLS will never fly

>>14808225
Launching a ballistic missile into a hostile country is not a good idea.

>>14808278
Elon accidentally and casually disrupts the yacht industry, basically one-upping Jeff once again.

>>14808279
Whyyyyyy?

>>14808287
/sfg/ wills it

>>14808278
based Pluto poster

WE ARE GOING ON SATURDAY

>>14807747
Babylon 5
>spin gravity
>the ONLY sensible space fighter design, ever
>paraterraformed Mars and Jovian moons
>California gets nuked in the backstory

>>14807879
No, it was being studied as a LEO-to-GEO space tug. This was the 70s post Apollo, everyone wanted GEO sats.

>RS-25s need to be chilled to -420 deg F
starshipfags BTFO

>>14808299
Was this actually announced, or are you just making shit up? I just want that piece of shit rocket to launch already.

>>14808315
This is actually being announced right now. They're go for Saturday. Weather is crap though, so that's a known risk.

>>14808315
It's in the ongoing press conference.

>>14808281
>Launching a ballistic missile into a hostile country is not a good idea.
If by hostile you mean at war, then that's exactly what to do with a ballistic missile. You probably wouldn't want to put any marines in it though.

>>14808315
https://twitter.com/NASAGroundSys/status/1564747731108827145

>>14808315
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BpRN5BiQxo

>>14808330

>>14808315
>>14808330
they deleted it but it said:
> ARTEMIS I UPDATE: @NASA will conduct another Artemis I launch attempt NET Saturday, Sept. 3rd at 2:17 p.m. EDT. #Artemis

>>14808333
I'll have to wake up early for this one.

Elon sisters....
https://twitter.com/NASAArtemis/status/1564744149231976449

>>14808340
FUCK YES LET'S GO
I hate SLS as a development process but man-capable capsules in lunar orbit are always cool.

>>14808340
Even if Starship is ready and whatnot... they still do not have the launch license

>>14807747
The truth is there are no good sci fi movies nor shows nor books. Sci fi is a difficult genre. The closest you can get is the handful of good engineering videos on youtube.

>>14808340
> yet another scrub

>>14808348
2001 A Space Odyssey has entered the chat

>>14808357
"yet another"? There's been exactly one.

>>14808340
If you're going to do sister you might as well go all the way with Elona

>>14808340
At this point I hope it explodes just so that it's finally over. This is getting ridiculous.

>>14808363
I'm retrocausalalistically posting from April 20th 2024

>>14808369
>Unhinged elona fan

Atomic Rockets is having a server migration.

sooo... there was a possible static fire attempt today?

>>14807486

Funny how /sfg/ creams itself over spaceplanes ONLY in the threads where I DON'T post my designs for critique.

I took the goal of 500 tonnes to LEO, fully reusable with a 10m x 10m x 50m payload bay (and to keep the launch stack under 120m in height). What I got now is essentially a modernized, scaled-up Venture star assisted by two strap-on boosters that self recover by propulsive landing.

Aside from the shitposting, the only feedback from the last time I posted this which really got me thinking was the difficulty of vertical integration of the orbiter from horizontal resting position on the ground. I'm unsure how the same technique used for the space shuttle could be scaled up accordingly.

Ok, but how did they fix the issue so quickly

>>14808387
probably thermal cycled it until it came free
That valve is probably inaccessible without ripping the guts out of the propulsion section

>tfw you realize that SLS could've launched yesterday if the sensor wasn't bad

>>14808385
The biggest problem I see with that design is sheer size. It dwarfs the Stratolaunch. You'd need to make it a seaplane as well as a spaceplane or it couldn't fucking land anywhere.
or just use retropropulsive landing

>>14808387
>Engine #3 was around 30-40 degrees warmer than other engine (-245 F)
>A faulty sensor may be providing an incorrect reading of the engine temperature
>The team plans to begin the bleed 30 to 45 minutes earlier in the countdown than it occurred on Monday and monitor the engine temperature during the bleed
>"Coming into yesterday's attempt, we said that if we couldn't thermally condition the engines, we're not going to launch"
https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/30/world/artemis-1-nasa-update-scn/index.html

They said it was a bad sensor, The liquid hydrogen was inside but the sensor was giving a bit of a different read than expect. They will cool it early this time and if the problem still occur they will roll it back to assembly building

How do you want SLS and Orion to RUD/fail on Saturday?
Explosion on the pad à la AMOS-6
Lifting off the ground some meters, falling, and then carpet-bombing the pad like Antares in 2014
Kino kaboom in the sky like Falcon 9 in that in-flight abort test
Failure on SECO and Columbia-style reentry
Permanent loss of communication with Orion due to shitty software
All of the above

>>14808393
or maybe there's a big ol' crack in the feed line oh boy!

>>14808410
the SLS haters are praying for a pad explosion that takes out the tower and forces a program cancellation

>>14808410
>Lifting off the ground some meters, falling, and then carpet-bombing the pad like Antares in 2014

This would be kino as fuck but I think the mid flight megaboom is the most likely

Hey there sfg, NASA outreach here. We know you kids don't think SLS is 'bussin fr' but what if we made Skylab II out of it?
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20120016760/downloads/20120016760.pdf

I want the cubesats to be alright. Orion burning up on reentry would be funny though.

>>14808420
inb4 it goes off course during the core stage burn and rams straight into the ISS

>>14808385
So, just what are the physical dimensions on these booster engines supposed to be? Don't misunderstand, A 7 MN FFSC engine is in in the right power class for the weight you're talking about lifting, but it's only got a bit less giddyup than the RD-170 or F-. Both of those had a diameter of about 3.8m and you're talking about clustering nine of these.

Also, it's going to be interesting to try and throttle down one of those far enough to land one of those booster on its tail. Throttling the whole stack back to 4% of max like SpaceX does for the Falcon 9 would leave you with about 2.5 MN of thrust. Dialing one engine back to ~35% doesn't seem too outlandish (the RD-170 could do about 40%), but you're still trying to land a booster on its tail with thrust in the mega newton range with a booster whose dry mass is going to be a lot lighter in proportion to its gross weight. It might make more sense in terms of engineering and thematics to go with a flyback system instead of a retropropuslive one.

>>14808425
That kind of event would be far too based for this timeline

>>14808385
Here's some critique, pretty much the only advantage of le spaceplane is being able to land at an airport. Where the fuck are you going to land that.

>Strap on boosters

Not exactly SSTO faggot

>>14808424
>Orion burning up on reentry would be funny though.
You mean only during Artemis 1, r-right anon?

why are the artemis launch windows 2 hours?

>>14808439
science & math

>>14808439
Hydrologgs :DD

>>14808410
>Explosion on the pad à la AMOS-6
>Lifting off the ground some meters, falling, and then carpet-bombing the pad like Antares in 2014
either of those suit me fine. only a fiasco at takeoff with dozens of cameras recording it it will sufficiently embarrass the USG into cleaning house at NASA. a puff of smoke at 80,000 feet or orbital fuck up wont dent the public mind so inertia will prevail

starship is great and all, but what about a starship+ sized pressure fed dumb as a rock expendable booster? I feel like something without the engine or heat shield complexity could have a place

https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1564752097429622784
>Honeycutt's team is still writing the flight rationale for the operational changes they'll make, basically beginning the chill down sooner.
>writing the flight rationale
literally making shit up as they go

>>14808438
Sure that too

>>14808449
pressure fed being cheap or easy is the biggest lie sold to humanity

>>14808452
To be fair this can work, but only if you're actually competent software gods like SpaceX chads who do it all the time

>>14808439
You know how in stock KSP you aim at the moon as it's coming up past the horizon? It's like that but a lot more precise

>>14808449
If Starship flips the table hard enough I could see China trying for something like this. We're already passing China in launch rate and we're outright lapping them in mass to orbit. Something big and inefficient but simple could help them close that gap.

Then again, I could also see them deciding that an Orion isn't that bad an idea, because who really cares about Inner Mongolia anyway?

>>14808449
>starship+ sized pressure fed
kek yes build an 18x70m booster and pressurize it to 200bar

>>14808472
> chink built Orion
plz no

>>14808456
surely cheaper and easier than a full flow staged combustion engine...? Though oldspace does kind make it easy to lose perspective on difficulty

>>14808472
especially since the public only looks as far as size comparison images

>>14808479
ok yeah I hadn't thought about that lmao
is that doable? I'm not an experienced water-tank-flyer

>>14808463
>You know how in stock KSP you aim at the moon as it's coming up past the horizon?
No?

>>14808492
Well you do.

>>14808439
launch site gotta be pointing at* the moon

>chimps out on neighbor countries
>blows up their own satellites for shits and giggles
>chimps out over space program
>get hated by the entire world
>ayy we dindu nuffin
>now planning to build a fucking space station of their own while their country is collapsing internally

What the fuck is Russia's problem?

>>14808497
*gotta be in the plane of the moon's orbit

>>14808491
>surely cheaper and easier than a full flow staged combustion engine...?
compare a similar sized pressure fed engine to raptor

>>14808447
>AMOS-6
As fun as that would be, I'm hoping for something more in the range of GRS IIR-1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_aHEit-SqA

>>14808425
>>14808436
that would be the most entertaining outcome

>>14808499
>chimps out on arabic countries
>blows up their own satellites for shits and giggles
>chimps out over countries without privately owned central banks
>get hated by the entire world
>ayy we dindu nuffin
>now planning to put a woman and nigger on the moon while their country is collapsing internally

What the fuck is America's problem?

>>14808518
or it could ram into the Chinese space station instead hmmm

>>14808526
fuck lmao that would be even better, imagine the outrage

>>14808523
Just how much /pol/ are you willing to tolerate in an answer to that question?

>>14808523
amazing how the usa has been on the knife's edge of collapse for the last 30 years, at least in the consequence-free ramblings of dime store nostradomuses on the internet. why don't you apply your uncanny powers of prognostication to the stock market, oh grand and peerless sage

>>14808523
>chimps out on arabic countries
Based
>blows up their own satellites for shits and giggles
USA has never done this
>chimps out over countries without privately owned central banks
Schizo meme
>get hated by the entire world
*envied
>now planning to put a woman and nigger on the moon while their country is collapsing internally
Keep seething, we've been "collapsing" for over a century if people like you are to be believed

>>14808538
>privately owned central banks

(X) Doubt

>>14808523
Based

>>14808531
>>14808538
>>14808543
settle down creaturas

Tory Bruno

>>14808538
>USA has never done this

Wrong and newfag pilled

>>14808552
t. chattel state of USA

>>14808538
>>chimps out on arabic countries
>Based
Cringe
>>blows up their own satellites for shits and giggles
>USA has never done this
USA did anti-satellite tests with the same outcome than those of Russia
>>chimps out over countries without privately owned central banks
>Schizo meme
Change "privately owned central banks" by "not aligned with USA"
>>get hated by the entire world
>*envied
*disgusted
>>now planning to put a woman and nigger on the moon while their country is collapsing internally
>Keep seething, we've been "collapsing" for over a century if people like you are to be believed
2 weeks

>>14808534
I wouldn't worry about it

>>14808538
we sure did and it was cool as fuck

>>14808553
I heard he speaks Parseltongue

>>14808569
Only pilot in history to get an air-to-space kill.

>>14808538
We shot down Solwind P78-1 back in 1985 and USA-193 in 2008.

>>14808558
> choosing empire over the republic
that commie faggot FDR really did a number on you

>>14808572
The first space-to-Earth kill will be much more exciting.

>>14808576
FDR only was only continuing what Wilson started.

>>14808400

Would flaps make the landing approach somewhat more manageable?

>>14808431

I just didn't want to sling 150 raptors together

>>14808437

My goal was never to make an SSTO.

>>14808581
I wonder if the US secretly has some rods-from-god/hammer of dawn type shit.

>>14808491
>>14808504
Pressure fed sucks ass because once you lose pressure you are 100% guaranteed to fail your mission. A gas generator can be restarted if you use torch ignition or keep a few extra doses of TEATEB. Even electric pumps are better than pressure fed for most missions.

>>14808581
Columbia's commander got seven.

>>14808583
Wilson was a pious dope but he saw Bolsheviks for what they were, FDR had Stalins spies in his admin shaping policy

>>14808586
The problem with rods from God is orbital mechanics and kinetic energy. An object in orbit is moving some 15,000 miles per hour. If you want to drop it STRAIGHT DOWN you need to null out that orbital velocity completely so gravity can pull it straight down. This is hard and takes a lot of energy. (I.e., it's expensive.) You also have the option of only changing the orbit a little bit, so the object you want to drop comes down in an arc instead of a straight vertical line, but that's not good because then it scorches its way through the atmosphere and bleeds off most of its kinetic energy into the air; that's how spacecraft reenter the atmosphere.

So while a very cool idea, rods from God aren't very practical. Stupid orbital mechanics.

>>14808585
>
>Would flaps make the landing approach somewhat more manageable?
Your spaceplane needs a 150 meter WIDE runway as drawn. More if the wings aren't to scale. It's got 2-3 times the wingspan of a B-52. It is too wide for the Space Shuttle runways. Making it a seaplane is the only way it won't be restricted to dry lakebeds unless you scale it down.

I don’t know whether to expect Artemis 1 to succeed because of OldSpace autism, or to fail because of OldSpace autism (too).

>>14808585
I think the issue is less any inherent lack of maneuverability and more that it'd need a runway long enough to qualify as an interstate highway.

The boosters are going to be suffering from something not completely unlike the square-cube law; the weight of the fully loaded system is going to grow far faster than the dry weight as you scale things up, so you're going to need to be able to go a lot lower on the thrust to manage a powered landing. Something like 7 MN engines would be required for takeoff but might be impractical for landing at any reasonable throttle range.

The simplest solution would probably be to just have a second set of lower power engines for landing. You can have them pull double-duty if you use them as verniers on ascent. That way you can make you monster main engines simpler by leaving out any need for gimbaling.

>orbital bombardment
x-37b had an orbital bomber version that they were studying
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna3077821

back then this was a ridiculous idea even if it was feasible. but now? who knows. the x-37b is mature technology and spaceflight is alot cheaper. not only that, but the x-37b can stay in space for years, giving you an option to release the bombs whenever you want.

>>14808623
>orbital bombardment
isn't that illegal?

>>14808624
just the WMD version

>>14808624
I will make it legal.

>>14808523
>Russia is good because America bad!!!!!

operation plowshare but rods from gods when

>>14808624
In theory. In reality all these countries smile and shake hands with a knife behind their back just in case.

>>14808628
This is the Russian's only comeback

>w-well America bad too

Literal nigger tier society, only reason any innovation happened in Soviet times was because of Czechs/Ukrainians/Gerogians etc

WE ARE GOING (to scrub)

>>14808633
Man, it’s so stupid. I don’t support a lot of shit the US does. That doesn’t mean I’ll instantly suck Russia and China’s cock to get back at them.

mastenbros its OVER
https://spacenews.com/astrobotic-bids-for-masten-space-systems-assets/
the coolest bit of tech they had was the landing pad made by rocket exhaust , now it will probably never be used

>>14808642
Next time if your business hinges on a third party's investment get it in writing

Fun spaceflight fact: The USAF actually gave names to a lot of their Titan II ICBM’s. Some of them flew test missions which added more hilarity. My favorite Titan II names include:

>Bubble Girl
Just cute desu. We need a 60’s pinup rocket girl with a Titan II

>Gentle Annie
Once again, a cute name for an ICBM

>Busy Bee
Odd name but hilarious.

>Silver Bullet
Badass name for an ICBM

Most of these missiles flew in 1963-1965 as test flights. Active ICBMs sadly never received the cute nicknames.

My favorite has to be “Awful Tired.” “Awful Tired” flew in 1963 but failed. This was due to a loss of power on liftoff, which led to a loss of control on the ICBM. So “Awful Tired” failed because it became awfully tired.

>>14808624
Not afterwards

>>14808650
A lot of these names can be found on Wikipedia. Once again, hilarious.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Titan_launches

>>14808410
At the ideal altitude for as much debris to strike as many Earthers as possible.

I HATE EARTHERS

mars needs some diversity of color, shits just...red...

>>14808452
>literally making shit up as they go
Sounds like Elon Musk's SpaceX. What a joke

>>14808653
Pure SOUL in rocket form

>>14808385
How did you get the 7MN thrust value? I'm also doing napkin math and there's only a few methalox engines (Raptor, BE-4 and the Neutron engine) to get values from, which have only 1-2MN and you are forced into having shitloads of little engines >>14808585. And what specific impulses are you using?

>>14808585

A simple measurement on-drawing puts the wingspan at 70 meters. It should be able to land on a reasonably sized runway.

how much glowing equipment is the CIA slapping on starlinks do you think

I wonder if the Chinese will try grabbing one with their space plane

>>14808523
sfg litmus test right here

>>14808667
It says right on the diagram:

>booster powerplant
>x9 (18 in total)
7,000,000 newton class full flow staged combustion cycle
>liquid CH4 fuel, liquid O2 oxidizer

The idea would be that this would need a new (and quite large) engine rather than an existing one

>>14808682
Yes, but is such an engine realistic? Otherwise I could just go "12 MN, 360s isp lmao"

>>14808385
>make a single booster stage for reduced complexity
>remove the dead mass wings
>make the body cylindrical for easy of manufacturing
>add fins for attitude control
1/10 the cost per kg to orbit you are welcome

>>14808714
Revolutionary, get this man some grid paper

>>14808714
>remove the dead mass wings
c r o s s r a n g e

Hey guys, I'm back after 16 years. So,how long before we set foot on saturn?

>>14808691
I don't think it's too far off from being a realistic ask. it'd be a very challenging engineering build but it's only really three raptor-equivalents packed into a single unit. I'm more worried about the power-scale relationship. 7,000 kN of thrust would make this the third most powerful liquid-fueled rocket engine ever to fly. Given the overall scale of this monster you can probably design an engine that'll still fit without the power involved melting everything the second it ignites, but we're missing more than a few relevant figures.

And you can absolutely go "12 MN, 360s isp lmao". You just need to figure out what those design requirements entail and then work outwards from there. The Sea Dragon started with Bob Truax going "what if we built a 350 MN pressure-fed engine in a shipyard roflmao" and ended up with a design that was actually plausible, if not necessarily practical.

>>14808721
It lands vertically anywhere on earth even on oceans, safer than air planes in that regard.

>>14807432
Solids get enormous mass flow rate. Pressure fed boosters don't.

>>14808523
>chimps out over countries without privately owned central banks
autonomous central bank != privately owned
The fact that you don’t understand this is one of the reasons your country is so fucked.
>inb4 you try to debate me because you are a retarded russian teenager
I don’t care, I’m not russian. Mismanage your economy as much as you want it’s not my problem.

>>14806881
Faggot pedo

>>14808385
You fucking idiot it's because your idea sucks and you never CHANGE IT, even a LITTLE BIT.

>>14808653
The Titan class truly is the definition of soul. Why the fuck did they cost so much though, they look like they were cobbled together with spare parts

>>14808662
Well, get cracking. You'll need a magnet, tons of water, and lots more nitrogen.

>>14808751
They were cheap while Martin was churning out LGM-25s by the dozen to fill gopher holes out in the Dakotas. Once solid fuel ICBMs like the Minuteman and Peacekeeper started taking over the arsenal all those economies of scale went up in a cloud of delicious orange smoke.

>>14808756
Just paraterraform it. Your raw resource needs drop by literally a billion times.

>>14808756
Shield at Mars L1?

bro bros, it's brover

>>14808780
No, the magnet is to attract the steel Starships

>>14808091
Is their biggest benefit and almost need for the wings, is to do anything to help slow down even a little on reentry?

Also give general buffer zone of stability by designating sections that experience an equal distance of the bodies interacted air