/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15783771
Sorry for taking a while to respond.
>What exactly is the crossover point/commonality between spaceflight autism and homosuck autism?
Don't think there is one.
>How do you get into both these things?
Homestuck: just decided to read the webcomic one day.
/sfg/: I don't remember, but I think I was around for all but the first Starhopper launch.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA I'M SO FUCKING SICK OF WAITINGGGGGG

>>15784496
Molniya: for when you don't have anything Proton shaped yet, but you still really want to do interplanetary missions.

>>15784496
Glass the Earth, demigod war eventually

>>15784518
NRHO: for when you don't want to call it a Molniya

>>15784496

>>15784524
Oh hey, I build this in KSP all the time

Cancel MSR

>>15784496
FTS Archive
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KCJBL632oieD1r6JOh_5Eg9NTcf_-hH8?usp=drive_link

>>15784496

Soyuz A: fuck it, we don't need the N-1 to go to the moon!

>>15784533
The original yeet train

>>15784533
What are those tiny pods attached to arms on the sides?

>>15784545
Probably some kind of "Aнтeннa." Earlier models of Soyuz had a lot of fairly prominent doodads hanging off of them.

Really excited for another thread of one faggot flinging shit everywhere and the jannies not cleaning it up until one minute before stage separation

is he just bluffing?

Since I seem to on a bit of a sovietposting bender, here's something very awkward looking that they were doing with V-2s back in the late 40s.

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1708971997949018373

Blue Reef is dead. What was the point of even submitting the bid in the first place? Just to deny SpaceX?

>>15784574
I always forget that the russians had their own germans / V2 lineage. Literally the V2 is the father of all rockets ever

>>15784580
are you a fucking idiot?

>>15784585
What.

>>15784580
I remember some anon posted a rocket engine 'family tree' a while back that I never saved. V2 is the mother of all rockets.

>>15784580
Soyuz and Saturn both can trace direct descent back to Peenemünde.

>>15784578
Blue Disappointment redemption arc?

When you try not to post EDS bait on /sfg/

>>15784604
They're apparently more interested in lunar projects. Given that they've actually won a contract for that I don't really have any problems with this plan. Reef was always a weird looking station and having it be serviced by Starliner in every render they made of it didn't make the project seem more probable.

>>15784578
SpaceX's bid was so shit they laughed at it

>>15784607
Elon Musk will be bankrupt in 5 years tops guaranteed. not even bait BTW he said it him-self

>>15784274
post the graphs

>>15784562
That's from 2021 bro

And long-term they do have to pay for all the launches that SpaceX is doing for them. They've done 110 so far and even at a conservative estimate of $20 million internal costs per launch that's still $2.2 billion not counting the cost of the hardware, the R&D and the people

>>15784578
More like Orbital Queef

>>15784612
SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UUUUUUUP

>>15784610
oneill cylindar cancelled :(

>>15784618
Well, if you're really serious about building Zeon you're gonna need to set up a lot of material processing on the moon first. They might actually be taking things in the right order for once.

>>15784621
that is a cope. bezos could just buy thousands of falcon 9s to build Bezos-1

Snoot

>>15784629
god they had such pathetic upper stage engines back then

>>15784615
>And long-term they do have to pay for all the launches that SpaceX is doing for them
who is paying?
SpaceX is their own customer on these flights.

>>15784632
Like I said, they have to have the money to spend on the launch hardware, the people to make the satellites, the launch itself and the R&D for all of it

It costs them a lot less because it's their rocket and they get it "at cost" but there's still a cost

>>15784634
so moral od the story is spacex will go bankrupt Q4 of next year?

>>15784637
They're literally the most valuable strategic launch asset in the world

The government would bail them out rather than risk it collapsing

>>15784632
Starlink is the customer, which as its own corporate entity is legally distinct from SpaceX.

>>15784631
rockets could JUUUUST barely make it to LEO lol, those were dark days

>>15784552
Here's a better image of how the docking sensors were usually supposed to line up

>>15784578
So who the fuck is running things over there

Bezos doesn't care, and Bob Smith doesn't give a shit

>>15784647
Dave Limp

He's new

Bob Smith got ejected last week

>>15784644
Ugh it’s so fucking weird I love it

>>15784650
Smith isn't out until January

>>15784651
Soviet spaceflight definitely had its own style

>>15784652
If we're going by measurable progress Smith's been out for years, but you're not wrong

>The Federal Communications Commission has fined Dish Network $150,000 for failing to properly remove a satellite from geostationary orbit, the U.S. regulator said Oct. 2 in a first for its space debris enforcement action.

>The settlement includes an admission of liability from Dish for leaving EchoStar-7 at 122 kilometers above its operational geostationary arc, less than halfway to where the satellite broadcaster had agreed.

>>15784669
>150K
Symbolic fine

WHERE IS LAUNCH I DONT WANT IT IN TWO WEEKS I WANT IT NOW

>>15784669
>>15784676
To my knowledge this is the first time something like this has happened though

Hey just so everyone knows, the united states likes to act all high and mighty about >muh space junk, china is le bad, sign out artemis accords for clean space, etc.
But as late as 2018 the US was still flying delta IIs and leaving sizeable space junk all over the place, so this weird finger pointing and mightier-than-thou attitude feels so phony

Imagine using whataboutism in current year

>>15784699
Whataboutism isnt a word.

>>15784699
what about using ad hominem?

>>15784692
They're testing new regulatory limits

Anyway, here's a Proton-K with a Soyuz on top of it.

>>15784699
You’re not using that stupid reddit phrase the way you think you are

>>15784706
Was gonna say that sounded like a made up r*dditor word

>>15784697
>But as late as 2018 the US was still flying delta IIs and leaving sizeable space junk all over the place
>as late as 2018
>accords signed in 2020
>China's littering of orbit only accelerates while the US takes active measures to reduce their own
Boil yourself in oil alongside the dogs, wumao

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqRREz0iBes
Tom Scott made a half hour video on the VLT and ELT

>>15784697
Rockets like Delta II don't leave large pieces in low orbit that have uncontrolled reentry in a few days.

>>15784705
Cursed

>>15784732
cant stand this fag

>>15784759
Not as cursed as the ride you were supposed to take on it. Six days in just the reentry capsule so you could have a shot at pulling off a lunar flyby before Apollo 8. A pair of tortoises made the trip but they never got around the actually putting cosmonauts in it. Given that eight out of ten Proton launches would find a way to explode in 1969 that was probably a good thing.

>>15784773
He seems like he should have trooned out but avoided that somehow

>>15784828
is that what your brain goes to? fucking trannies?

FWS status?

wen hop

>wen hop

>>15784912
Die

This amuses me greatly

>>15784988
Marge what is this about.

>>15784988
Until there's a reference design (i.e. a finished Starship, tanker variant, and depot) they have no clue what it looks like. That clipart picture of a rocket is as much a Starship as a small 3D model of what it looks like now

>>15784996
Yes, unlike the other, existing NTR and nuclear electric spacecrafts

>>15784996
retard

What type of resume would it take to get a SpaceX Boca Chica internship as a sophmore.

>>15784996
Tory pls

>>15784828
Maybe he realized>>15784849
it's a stupid idea.

>>15784828
Anon I hate troons as much as the next guy but thinking Tom Scott is a troon is next level derangement. Consider laying off the >>>/pol/ browsing, its good for you.

why are we not sanctioning every company that shows up at the iac in baku?

>>15785092
Why exactly would the US government do that?

>>15785094
same reason we sanction russia

>>15785086
Early Tommo had the troon phenotype

>>15785092
You're not thinking like someone who works at the State Department. It's not about good or bad, but realpolitik. There's nothing to gain by sanctioning a hellhole and people visiting it.

>>15785096
Again with the /pol/ terms like being a troon is ever genetic. Thats just the standard nerd look from the 2000s anon, this was before the entire transepidemic also, nobody even wanted to be a tranny back then you are just mindrotted from browsing /pol/ to thinking any guy not at peak masculinity is a troon or fag even if this was well before 2016. If this isnt evidence enough that you need to cut /pol/ out of your browsing habits then theres no hope for you.
Anyways back on topic, WHERE IS THE LICENSE FAA IM GETTING SICK OF WAITING HERE

I like hullo, he seems genuinely intelligent and knowledgeable. He's obviously not going to be le based: he has a daughter and lives in california.

>>15785096
Kinda cute. I wish he was a tranny and I get fucked by him in my ass

>>15785103
I'm just glad he didn't (I assume) saw his dick off, no need to get your neovagina in a twist

>TROONS
>TROONS TROONS TROOND
>CUD DIG OFF HAHAHA
spaceflight?

>>15785104
I hate on him here solely because I get to use this image

>>15785113
I stated I am waiting for FAA approval.

>>15785104
He is the archetypal SA goon and always will be.

>>15785118
that explains why goon is now a synonym for masturbation

>>15785113
best i can do is rocket racing league, powered by armadillo aerospace

>>15784669
Articles from spacenews and CNBC about the fine, and I don't think the most important aspect is the money here
can't the FCC block giving a license if some required actions aren't taken or guaranteed for future satellites?
---
https://spacenews.com/fcc-fines-dish-network-for-botched-satellite-de-orbit/
> FCC fines Dish Network for botched satellite de-orbit
> TAMPA, Fla. — The Federal Communications Commission has fined Dish Network $150,000 for failing to properly remove a satellite from geostationary orbit, the U.S. regulator said Oct. 2 in a first for its space debris enforcement action.
> The settlement includes an admission of liability from Dish for leaving EchoStar-7 at 122 kilometers above its operational geostationary arc, less than halfway to where the satellite broadcaster had agreed.
> The regulator said it approved a plan from Dish in 2012 to move the satellite at the end of its mission 300 kilometers above geostationary orbit, which is about 35,786 kilometers above the Earth.
> Dish had estimated it would need to start moving the satellite in May 2022 to ensure it had enough fuel for the trip after two decades in orbit — but just three months ahead of the planned move the company found insufficient propellant remaining.
----
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/02/fcc-enforces-first-space-debris-penalty-in-dish-network-settlement.html
> FCC enforces first space debris penalty in $150,000 settlement with Dish
> The FCC called the agreement “a breakthrough settlement” in the increasingly concerning realm of space debris.

SpaceX wins $70 million Space Force contract for Starshield military satellites, SpaceX fires up Falcon Heavy rocket ahead of Psyche asteroid mission launch, Japan's SLIM 'moon sniper' spacecraft leaves Earth orbit ,
----
https://www.space.com/spacex-starshield-space-force-contract
> The one-year contract is worth $70 million and was confirmed by a Space Force spokesperson in a statement given to CNBC. SpaceX has not yet commented on the contract.
> The satellites will be able to communicate with existing Starlink satellites through a laser communications systems already aboard SpaceX's massive broadband constellation, potentially boosting the range and capabilities of Starshield as the company and the Pentagon develop the new military-focused constellation.
> SpaceX has already launched more than 5,000 Starlink satellites to date, according to astronomer Jonathan McDowell, and over 4,000 remain operational. The company has applied to launch nearly 30,000 additional satellites on top of those.
----
https://www.space.com/spacex-falcon-heavy-static-fire-psyche-asteroid-mission
> The 'static fire' test occurred on Saturday (Sept. 30).
> The Falcon Heavy has flown seven times to date, most recently in July. Psyche will be the rocket's first NASA mission.
----
https://www.space.com/japan-slim-moon-lander-leaves-earth-orbit
> SLIM's touchdown try is still a ways away; Wednesday's "meeting" will be a lunar swing-by, one more step on the probe's long, looping and fuel-efficient journey to the moon. JAXA officials have said that SLIM will likely arrive in lunar orbit three to four months after launch, with the landing attempt coming a month or two after that.
> SLIM's landing will be a milestone in another way as well. The mission aims to touch down within a mere 328 feet (100 meters) of its target point inside Shioli, a small crater on the moon's near side (which explains the probe's "moon sniper" nickname).

Jeff Fousts review of the book "Elon Musk" by Walter Isaacson
tl:dr there are a lot of errors in it
---
https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4659/1
> Review: Elon Musk
> Isaacson focuses much of his attention on trying to figure out Musk’s personality: “Could he have been more chill and still be the one launching us towards Mars and an electric-vehicle future?” His book is an argument that he could not; that Musk’s focus, snap decision-making, and sometimes brusqueness are all essential to his success, factors that Musk himself, and some who know him well, attribute to Asperger’s Syndrome. “Elon is not an ass, and yet sometimes he will say things that are very assholey,” said Gwynne Shotwell, president and chief operating officer of SpaceX, who has worked with Musk for more than two decades.
> Unfortunately, for all the access Isaacson had for the book, including with Musk and his friends and family, the book is riddled with errors. Some are minor, like incorrect dates: a photo with Musk in a Tesla conference room with a SpaceX launch playing on a screen is dated 2008, but the launch shows a Falcon 9, which made its debut in 2010. (A closer inspection of the image suggests the launch was CRS-14, in 2018.) Isaacson writes that “in 2014, SpaceX built a rudimentary launchpad” at Boca Chica, Texas; all SpaceX did in 2014, and the next few years, was moving dirt around there. He also writes that Musk has been “warmly embraced” by the Pentagon “because SpaceX was the only American entity capable of sending major military satellites and crews into orbit.” That is no doubt a surprise to both United Launch Alliance, which continues to launch major military satellites, and the Pentagon, which has no crews in orbit. And those are just a few examples of varying degrees of severity.

>>15785153
>The satellites will be able to communicate with existing Starlink satellites through a laser communications systems already aboard SpaceX's massive broadband constellation

Erm, isn't this basically the exact situation that Elon wanted to avoid in Ukraine? It's one thing having a solely military cluster that you can wipe your hands clean of but it's kind of different when it still relies entirely on your civilian system. Maybe it's just a shitty layer of plausible deniability or whatever....

>>15785159
> Musk also was at one point (not specified by Isaacson in the book) so excited about the prospects of Starship that he announced to SpaceX executives in a meeting that he was cancelling the Falcon Heavy. Those in the meeting alterted Shotwell, who rushed into the meeting to explain that vehicle was still needed for military missions. “Once I gave Elon the context, he agreed we couldn’t do what he wanted,” she said.
>What does Isaacson think of Musk? “The explosion of Starship was emblematic of Musk,” he writes at the end of the book after a recap of that April test flight, “a fitting metaphor for his compulsion to aim high, act impulsively, take wild risks, and accomplish amazing things—but also to blow things up and leave smoldering debris in his wake while cackling maniacally.” (Isaacson gets a little carried away with his metaphorical assessment later in that passage, referring to the “Karman line of craziness” among other things.) That message comes across plainly in his book, but future historians would be careful to doublecheck his statements.

>>15785160
its just extra capability I guess, but that does blur the lines
but I mean by the same logic, basic fiber lines are a military asset, what is actually categorized as military and what is civilian? the military uses civilian stuff

>>15785162
The Internet began life as ARPANet. The line has always been fuzzy.

>>15785162
>but I mean by the same logic, basic fiber lines are a military asset, what is actually categorized as military and what is civilian
>heh I know these handful of glownigger satellites wouldn't work without the 50 billion dollar civilian megaconstellation
>BUT
>since the glownigger satellites gapped the final comms step it doesn't count :^)

I just wanted to go to Mars...

Urfscum getting me down bros :(

>>15785153
>SpaceX wins $70 million Space Force contract for Starshield
how many satellites is that

>>15785182
At DoD prices about three.

>>15784773
>>15784828
>>15784849
>>15785073
>>15785086
>>15785096
>>15785103
>>15785107
>>15785105
So, y'all prefer to focus on trannies instead of the half hour of giant telescope hardware shown?

>>15785193
Fuck off, Scott

>>15785193
No one cares about ground based sòy shit. Worst of all doing fucking interferometery from urf.

>>15785193
>giant telescope hardware
Don't say that, I get these urges

For me it's FLUTE

the absolute state of /sfg/

>>15785206
might be cool, how big could you make this if you scale it to Starship size?

How orbital refueling will unlock humanity’s potential in space, Secrets of ExoMars,
---
https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4660/1
> Why in-space refueling is a gamechanger
> 1. Enable new missions:
> 2. Extended mission lifespan
> 3. Increased payload capabilities
> 4. Enhanced exploration opportunities
> 5. Ensuring space sustainability and debris mitigation
> 6. Maximizing economic viability
> In-space refueling is not just a novel concept; it’s a pivotal component of our future in space. It represents a shift from short-lived, one-off missions to a sustainable, enduring presence in space.
---
https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4662/1
> When we think of the secrets of Mars, we think of life there, possibly hidden below its surface. A European-Russian rover, ExoMars, was built to go there. It was due to land on June 10, 2023, and might even have found signs of life there by now. Instead, its secrets remain locked up—but on Earth.
> The ExoMars rover, called Rosalind Franklin after the famous British scientist, never got to its launch pad, because it was cancelled as a Russian-European mission within 96 hours of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. At that time, it was within weeks of being shipped to Moscow on its Russian lander, Kazachok, for transport to Baikonur for Proton launch on September 20, 2022.
> Why the hurry? It was not as if Rosalind Franklin was already in its cargo plane and on the runway. By contrast, in the United States, discussions between NASA and the Congress over many weeks led to a consensus that cooperation with Russia on the International Space Station should continue unaffected, a vastly different decision. The issue here, again, is not the merit of the decision, but the process.
> Younger readers should stick around to see if the ESA or Irish documents are, as the decades pass, ever released in archives. But until then, we will not know what happened over February 24–28, 2022.

>>15785206
If deployment can be made easy you could put these on probes - imagine a Neptune orbiter with a 2 meter telescope

>>15785206
For me, it's the TST

For me, it's kill all e*rthers

>>15785219
>Why the hurry?
Any excuse to avoid sending life-detecting equipment to Mars. The powers that be know something and are trying to delay it becoming public knowledge.

>>15784732
It's a beautiful video. Paranal is one of the most incredible accomplishments of engineering, and it's a magical place to visit. It's finally starting to look extremly large.

It's also rather uniquely one of the few big projects which has stayed on schedule the last few years. On the other hand TMT still hasn't started construction, it broke ground exactly 9 years ago next Monday. I bet they wish they picked a functional country like Chile.

>>15785193
/pol/ brain rot.

>>15784732
>>15785193
i actually just finished watching this and went to post it here
FIVE TIMES SHARPER THAN JST
wtf was the point of jst then

also
>1 reply
>20 replies about trannies
its fucking sad how far /sfg/ has fallen
/pol/ was a mistake

>>15785248
>FIVE TIMES SHARPER THAN JST

Don't care for the endless tranny posting. But you are a dick chopped eunuch if you believe this. Earth based scopes are a fucking joke and should have rocks dropped on them rather than pissing billions of dollars into the void.

>>15785248
The atmosphere is mostly opaque to infrared. JWST can do shit ELT can never do.

>>15785219
>Kazachok
More like Kamikaze. We all know what would have happened to ESA's rover. They dodged a bullet.
What is the post-USSR success rate at interplanetary missions? I think 0/2 or 1/3 if you could building an instrument for TGO.

how will spacex store cryogenic propellants for the 6 month voyage to mars?

>>15785248
They do different things. JWST is very sensitive for imaging and low resolution spectroscopy. Particularly at long wavelengths.

ELT will have higher resolution, both spatially and spectrally. It can work in the visible, where JWST has little sensitivity. It will have cutting edge complex instruments, whereas JWST has simple light ones. It will also have exotic modes which JWST isn't equipped for, like high performance coronagraphs for imaging earth like planets or high resolution spectroscopy.

>>15785258
And vice versa, ELT will do things JWST cannot.

>>15785268
In tanks.

>>15785248
Ground based astronomy is gay

>>15785273
>high performance coronagraphs for imaging earth like planets
HOEE could be pretty neat
https://www.centauri-dreams.org/2022/03/04/hoee-the-starshade-and-the-ground/

>>15785273
>imaging earth like planets
>from this paltry planet based scope looking through a hundred kilometres of atmospheric bullshit

Hilarious, I've got some bridges and effective vaccines you might be interested in purchasing? Excellent price, just for you my friend.

>>15785257
You know that money won't be allocated for spaceflight? Putting it into ELT is the most useful thing that money's gonna do
Also based Grovnd Based Telescopes making brainlets on /sfg/ seethe by just merely existing

>>15785300
>You know that money won't be allocated for spaceflight?

True

>Putting it into ELT is the most useful thing that money's gonna do

No, could be used for massive space interferometry scopes that can actually do what's on the label.

>Also based Grovnd Based Telescopes making brainlets on /sfg/ seethe by just merely existing

They are in the same family as SLS and friends. Useless söy shit that anyone with a brain hates.

>>15785298
Indeed. There is also a neat related proposal which is to launch satellites with laser guid stars for adaptive optics on ground based telescopes.

https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/orcas/about/

Visible light high order AO is only possible with a nearby bright star. Fine for planet, not so much everything else.

>>15785299
Let's see your calculations then.
The vast majority of planets that have been imaged are from the ground.

>>15785315
>The vast majority of planets that have been imaged are from the ground.

Hello these are planets light years away, not the shit a few AUs down the road.

>>15785308
I wonder when this retarded idea of "hurr GBT's don't work because de atmospheer" will disappear from this general
GBT's have made more discoveries in total than any orbital telescopes have. The atmosphere doesn't filter nearly as much light as you think it does. The only thing that GBT's aren't good at is infrared imagery due to carbon absorbing too much of it

>>15785300
you know the lack of transferrence of funding from telescopes to spaceflight plays no factor in the opinion that telescopes are a waste of time compared to spaceflight

>>15785321
>GBT's have made more discoveries in total than any orbital telescopes have
>pick all the low hanging fruit for a few hundred years
>cuck opposing scopes behind multi billion dollar government regulation military contractor bullshit
>hurrrr we have most discoveries

Wow amazing.

>>15785321
Also any kind of high UV

>>15785208
you can scale it up to any size
nothing says you need to fill up the puddle in one go and the jug of gallium or whatever can be of any arbitrary shape
unlike a solid mirror that has to fit inside a fairing in one piece

>>15785278
NOTHING IS A PERFECT INSULATOR NIGGA.

>>15785325
Modern GBT's can be made more powerful and larger than anything that can be launched into orbit in these times
JWST is the largest OST ever launched, cost 20 billion, and is only 6.5 meters in diameter. Such a non-infrared telescope would never be built on the ground
ELT's cost is projected to ~€1.15 billion with a mirror over 5x as large

>>15785331
That too due to the ozone layer

>>15785338
Educate yourself, nigga.

I know that visual astronomy doesn't really provide any scientific benefit anymore, but I think that it's kinda cool even for just a public outreach thing. You can take a picture and say "this is what YOUR OWN EYES will see", with none of that false color shit. Like the JWST pictures are cool, but they're not "real" the same way visual spectrum images are

>>15785339
>JWST is the largest OST ever launched, cost 20 billion, and is only 6.5 meters in diameter. Such a non-infrared telescope would never be built on the ground

Starship is happening. Now neck yourself.

>>15785308
>No, could be used for massive space interferometry scopes that can actually do what's on the label.
You literally have no idea what you're talking about. Interferometers are no replacement for monolithic telescopes. They have tiny fields of view (much smaller than even early AO), have shit sensitivity and are limited to a few modes.

>>15785319
Hello, 39 meters Vs 8 or 10 meters. Pretty big difference. Sensitivity is also a steep power of diameter, because the resolution decreases the background from the host star and makes the target more concentrated.

>>15785350
>Interferometers are no replacement for monolithic telescopes. They have tiny fields of view (much smaller than even early AO), have shit sensitivity and are limited to a few modes.

Good thing you can use laser interferometry to make telescopes as wide as you want in space then huh you fucking tranny?

>>15785037
what field?

>>15785321
Preach. It's exactly the kind useless perfectionism people rant about with mass optimisation. If it can be done from the ground cheaper and sooner then it should. Space should be reserved for wavelengths and applications that is impossible from the ground. There is already a long enough wait between major observatories, that's without trying to replace all the ground based ones.

>>15785325
>cuck opposing scopes
Retard. Nobody cares about telescopes unless it's NRO, and telescope programs barely have any weight to them, JWST is just a comical exception. If you want to blame anything, you can just dump everything on the shittle and shittle-derived turdware, that have regressed spaceflight decades since previous launch vehicles and made all designs abominations or severely gimped them. If anything it's e*rth sciences that have been appropriating unrightfully more money from other programs with their planetary observations.

>>15785349
So you're saying that OST's will get mirrors maybe 30% larger than what they have now?
Starship likely won't launch any space telescopes unless it gets a kick stage made for it, which would in turn reduce the available payload size for the telescope.
What kinds of telescopes would be launched on a Starship? Who would make them? How long until Starship is reliable enough to entrust a multi-billion dollar space telescope on it as payload, if ever? And could Starship even take some of the possible telescopes out to their desired orbits?

I know that Falcon 9 already launched one telescope, the IXPE, but starship would likely run into issues trying to recover the second stage from such an orbit. It would also have to be worth it to use such a heavy vehicle for a single telescope, so not just any tiny university telescope would get its own ride like IXPE did.

>>15785325
>cuck opposing scopes behind multi billion dollar government regulation military contractor bullshit
Oh yes, the ground based astronomy mafia is very strong in Congress. The government ground based astronomy budget in the US is paultry, they are so broke they couldn't even afford to join TMT or GMT. And they are being steamrolled by Europe.

europe could build their own starship program for the cost of the ELT

>>15785353
That doesn't help either of those issues. You are actually clueless. Lasers are just metrology, they're not magic. You also end up with shitty blolbs instead of images, radio astronomy has been doing that for quite a while.

>>15785370
Nope. The HLS contract alone was more.

>>15785325
Very valid point, actually.

>>15785370
hello seether

>>15785321
It grew out of ground based astronomers trying to block Starlink deployments and """planetary protection""" fags opposing Mars landings. Until the people looking at space have to yield to the people actually going to space the shitflinging will continue.

>>15785364
Starship's delta-V within Earth's SoI is basically infinite with a depot in LEO and aerobraking. A small storable-propellant kickstage would suffice for final delivery.

>>15784496

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1708887949276860601
its so fucking over

>>15785338
Zero boiloff storage is achieveable on Earth, where there's a thick warm atmosphere pressed onto everything.
The only, and I mean only, reason we don't already have zero boiloff rocket tanks on every cryogenic rocket stage flown is because it adds some mass. Not a huge amount of mass, not even a very significant amount of mass, but because everyone working in space tech had mass autism until the 2010s and a certain somebody worked diligently to kill any tech which could lead to development of depots, nobody built zero boiloff stages.
Anyway if you think zero boiloff methalox is hard, you must also think zero boiloff hydrolox is impossible, given the way colder temperature of LH2 and the subsequent much more difficult thermal management requirements (better insulation from both external radiant heat and internal conduction from warm areas to the tanks, more powerful heat pumps that operate with a way colder evaporator, etc).

>>15785339
JWST cost a shitload because it had to origami itself to fit into an Ariane 5, it required like 50 new technologies that didn't exist prior to the start of development, and they only built one.

>>15785398
>Anyway if you think zero boiloff methalox is hard, you must also think zero boiloff hydrolox is impossible, given the way colder temperature of LH2 and the subsequent much more difficult thermal management requirements (better insulation from both external radiant heat and internal conduction from warm areas to the tanks, more powerful heat pumps that operate with a way colder evaporator, etc).
yes. which is why the space shuttle tank was covered in that retarded orange foam which kept destroying the orbiter heat shield. if it was a stainless steel tank too much propellant would boil off.

>Axiom Hab 1 in late 2026, Starlab is going to made of steel (2.2cm thick in places) and built in a shipyard (no clean rooms to be found), 80 ton launch mass, 30 year lifespan, plastic recycling to produce rad shielding for Axiom

>>15785364
Starship lets you launch 8m diameter telescopes with zero folding, which is a huge improvement in terms of reducing complexity, and reducing complexity saves cost.
Starship doesn't need a kick stage, first of all it can refill propellants in LEO to go anywhere, and second it's powerful enough that you can just give the telescope like 50 tonnes of propellants so it can do its own maneuvering (and stationkeep for decades). No 8m space telescope is going to weigh so much that just adding propellant wouldn't be an option.
>what type
Anything really.

>>15785419
>Starship lets you launch 8m diameter telescopes with zero folding,
they will just make them larger and fold them

>>15785268
in a cycler depot
also providing power, thermal regulation radiators, extra radiation shielding, extra storage room for the 6 month trip and all the other shit you don't need on the surface
Starships will be used to construct it and act as the landing pods

This post was made by Buzz Gang

>>15785416
>built in a shipyard
so fucking based

>>15785423
Mass produced monolithic 8m telescopes would be cheap enough for every American college or university with an astronomy department to own one.

>>15784702
Masterful bait, Sir.

>>15785431
but they won't be made
instead you'll get jst 2

>>15785412
Lol I didn't even finish my thought there because I'm retarded.
>you must also think ZB hydrolox is impossible because XYZ
My point I was going to make was that multiple entities are very confident they will achieve ZB with hydrolox on both orbit-only stages and on Moon lander vehicles, and if they are confident enough that NASA is buying into it, we can be pretty sure SpaceX will solve the much easier problem of ZB methalox.
Oh and again we have ZB hydrolox on the ground on Earth already, too. It's just not useful for a first stage on Earth to have it. Also I'm pretty sure boiloff while waiting for launch isn't why the tanks are foam insulated: rather it's to prevent the liquification and freeze-out of oxygen and nitrogen onto the tank walls. Maybe it's both. If testing showed that omitting insulation adds more mass in ices anyway, then insulation actually makes total sense. Should have put it inside the stage though.

>>15785398
>Not a huge amount of mass
Uhm, every gram counts

>>15785423
It'll take a kick up the ass for the design teams to stop maximizing for performance rather than maximizing for cost effectiveness, and I'm willing to supply those kicks

>>15785357
total ground astronomy death

>>15785426
Cyclers were a solution proposed for an era where it was expected that humans would launch to Mars in a small capsule. Cyclers make no sense when you're going to Mars in Starship. Cyclers don't make economic sense when you have the launch costs provided by Starship, either.

>>15785452
But cyclers are so comfy, it's like a combination ocean liner and space station
They must be built

>>15785416
>fuck aluminum isogrid nonsense, weld it out of steel plate.
>fuck extremely tight tolerances, weld it together in a shipyard
>fuck super advanced composite radiation materials, just get the cheapest splid hydrocarbons you can find and use that to shield against radiation, it's still 80% as good per cubic centimeter
Ridiculously based, I hope they cause every other station building company's upper management to jump off of rooftops from the stress of trying to compete

>>15785445
>ZB
acronymtrannies rope

>>15785473
I prefer "ZeeBoi"

>>15785423
They should get unfolded and checked out in LEO with astronauts assisting then flown out to their final obit with electric thrusters.

>>15784732
I had no idea that the 4-telescope's data was combined mechanically and not digitally. "its too complex and too much data". Sheeeeeit.

>>15785446
Saving mass used to be congruent with saving money, because the launch vehicle options you had were weak and insanely expensive, and got more expensive the more capable they were.
Even in that paradigm there's an inflection point where the work to save more mass actually costs you more, rather than saving money. Most projects ended up being a little bit past the inflection point before Falcon 9.
The current era of Falcon 9 has blown up this paradigm, because it's actually a really capable big rocket, AND it's very cheap. The inflection point for reducing mass equalling higher costs has moved WAY left, and suddenly almost every single payload that exists today is hugely over engineered for mass reduction when it isn't necessary.
Starship will move that point again, even further left, such that there's almost zero gain to spending effort to reduce payload mass.
And yeah I'm aware that you didn't actually mean what you said but I wanted to rant about this and you gave me an opportunity

>>15785466
And of course Starship is the only vehicle that can launch it. But they have to solve the problem of the nosecone doors.

>>15785457
continuous stream of cyclers to jupiter

>>15785481
I enjoyed this rant

>>15785487
With tethers to exchange delta-v with passing ships

>>15785457
How much bigger in terms of habitat volume does a cycler need to be to provide a meaningful increase in comfort to the crew of a Starship? I'd say 5x, so ~5000 cubic meters of living space. That'd be a really big vehicle to build and supply.
And you do need to supply it, a lot. Every time a Mars-Earth cycler passes by Earth it needs a ~1km/s delta V to adjust its trajectory so it goes to the next Mars encounter. That requires propellant unless you are using a plasma magnet sail or something, which doesn't exist yet (though I hope it ends up actually working).

>>15785473
I'm just lazy

>>15785493
Cyclers seem like they make more sense as bulk cargo haulers
>plasma magnet sail
whatever happened with that thing anyway?

>>15785483
They will, and anyone who truly thinks they will have serious problems developing a payload bay door is being silly.

>>15785498
I have no idea how serious it is, but they surely have a problem. There was no prototype with huge hole being built and it didn't go anywhere, but for now they're focused on Starlink dispensers.

>>15785497
Bulk cargo is the worst possible use of a cycler. A cycler is not a freighter. It's passive apart from orbital adjustments. You need to launch from Earth and propel yourself to match orbits with the cycler and then dock: this means YOU do ALL the work to get to Mars, the only benefit is that you have a bigger habitat to chill in on the way. If you're only sending cargo, you get literally zero benefit from docking to a cycler for the duration of the coast to Mars.

>>15785416
Lets fucking go baby

>>15785497
>whatever happened to that thing anyway?
Getting funding for space tech demos is hard pls understand

>>15785511
Radiation protection
Defense against pirates

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1709179096956109253

> Roscosmos remains the champion of PowerPoint hardware, I see.

>>15785516
drop the act scumbag.

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1708989697035227298

Some comments on starliner

>>15785526
Boeing is disgraceful. NASA would be shit out of luck without SpaceX.

>>15785523
Seeing this was eye-opening. Roscosmos is unironically worse than NASA when it comes to grift and lack of ambition. NASA wants to build a retarded space station, but at least they want to build it around the moon and used it as an excuse to further fund SpaceX. Why the fuck would Russia waste time and money making another space station when they have had exclusive control over half the ISS for 30 years? Seems like pure grifting for jobs to me.

>>15785257
>>15785299
>>15785319
>>15785353
ban yourself

>>15785532
maybe prestige or perceived prestige to show their own people they are still a technologically advanced country

>>15785510
The door of Starship is a problem that's trivial to solve. I say that because it's one of the few things on Starship that can be forced into working just by throwing a bit more structural mass at the problem.
Starship doesn't currently have a big door because it has zero need for one. The Starlink dispenser door makes sense because Starship will be launching Starlink soon after achieving orbit.
I totally get being concerned that SpaceX has done basically no work on the big door, but I cannot stress enough that SpaceX is agile enough to wait until they have Starship working before touching the big door issue, and have the big door ready for launching customer payloads within a couple years. It's seriously no big deal.

>>15785452
starship IS a cycler.

>>15785532
Yeah kek

>>15785516
Not useful for cargo, pirates don't exist in space, and if they did the big dumb predictable-orbit cycler with almost zero maneuvering capability would be the ideal space piracy target.

>>15785542
I remember Musk saying multiple times that they try to solve the most difficult problems first
leaving the relatively trivial door would track

>>15785541
Perceived prestige has been the goal of Russian space activity since they were the USSR.

>>15785543
not by any definition of cycler

>>15785346
There is still a lot of work done in the visible, it's still a useful window.
Note that most Hubble images don't use anything like the ranges of your eyes. Most Hubble galaxy images have red being the near infrared, because it's one of Hubble's best filters. For Nebulae pictures they are even less real, as they largely use narrowband filters which are assigned colours different from where they started. Just because and image is mostly visible doesn't mean it's how we see things. The images are also stretched extensively to bring out the faint outskirts without saturating the inner parts. This allows you to see the structure, but it also means the colours are nothing like what we would see.

>>15785548
yup, it's also why they didn't start fucking around with the heat shield at all until after they already started doing landing tests. The most advanced TPS in the world is pretty useless if your landing maneuver doesn't work. Big payload door is pretty useless if Starship still can't reach orbit, etc.

>>15785556
Correct. I'm a fan of including a camera on probes that takes pictures of things in space that are balanced to closely resemble what a person would see if they were there (fuck the mass increase you can afford it you retarded mission designers)

An ambitious decadal survey for research in space

https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4661/1
> The new decadal survey for biological and physical sciences in space, though, offered a different kind of ambition.
> [...] laid out those scientific questions, which the survey placed into three categories. Once, called “Adapting to Space,” is focused on fundamental, primarily biological, changes to processes when in space. The second, “Living and Traveling in Space,” examines longer-term biological and physical science issues associated with the space environment, including creating sustainable habitats and using extraterrestrial resources. The third, “Probing Phenomena Hidden by Gravity or Terrestrial Limitations,” studies broader changes in biological or physical systems in microgravity or other aspects of space.
> The decadal recommended two such research campaigns. One called, Biorenegerative Life Support Systems, or BLiSS, would study various biological science questions to support development of self-sustainable systems. That would include, Van Vliet said, work towards closed-loop life support systems.
>The other, known by the highly contrived acronym of MATRICES (Manufacturing mATeRIals and proCessEs for Sustainability in space) would be devoted to understanding how to use space resources to produce materials needed for space exploration. One of the goals of MATRICES, Ferl said, is to “establish a sustainable in-space economy by learning what it takes to manufacture much of what is needed.”

>>15785593
> NASA, supporting work by teams led by four companies—Axiom Space, Blue Origin, Northrop Grumman, and Voyager Space—is also thinking about how to transfer research from the ISS to the commercial stations they are developing. In an interview before the release of the decadal survey, Lisa Carnell, director of the BPS division at NASA, said her division has been doing preparatory work, such as outlining all the current and planned ISS research facilities so that commercial station developers were aware of NASA’s research activities. “We wanted to give them the opportunity to see it all and see what their interests were in providing it,” she said.
>The division has also been trying to help that transition to commercial stations. Last year, Carnell’s predecessor, Craig Kundrot, announced a program called Commercially Enabled Rapid Space Science, or CERISS. The vision of CERISS, he said, was to allow researchers to fly to the ISS on private astronaut missions to perform “hyper-specialized” science far more efficiently than if a NASA astronaut was trained to do so.
> NASA is only beginning to review the decadal survey. Carnell said it would take her division, and SMD leadership, a few months to review the recommendations and chart a path forward. An initial response, including a town hall with the BPS research community, is tentatively planned for early next year.
> In an environment where NASA’s science efforts are facing pressures both internal and external—cost growth on Mars Sample Return and flat overall budgets—creative solutions will be essential to enabling anything close to the recommendations of the decadal.

>>15785526
Maybe Pam Melroy is trying to soften the blow for Boeing PR. Either because she wants to keep positive and in friendly relations with Boeing rather than being "wrong." Sort of a white lie.

The Space Force should safeguard US interests on the moon (op-ed)
>The potential for conflict beyond Earth is coming.
>Space Force can support those who walk and float on the old ground and seas of Earth and those working to open the Frontier at the same time. The Guardians can protect our ability to wage and win traditional confrontations down here — and should have this as today's prime focus. And, right now is the time to begin developing the Force of tomorrow that can, by its clear focus, intelligent design and superiority "secure our nation's interests" for the decades and centuries to come IN space by deterring those of malign intent from even starting plans to take the high grounds of the High Frontier.
https://www.space.com/space-force-safeguard-us-interests-moon

Looks like the military is getting us back into space boys. If you're in the space industry now, practice your MIC language because you're going to need it.

>>15785624

>>15785626
sorry didn't mean to quote

>>15785626
>software issue
Why does this keep happening?

>>15785641
Russians program their shit by slamming it in with mallets.

>>15785649
I'm going to save this to laugh at you when American lander crashes due to the same issue.

>>15785654
America is shooting out a bunch of private landers. The russian one was a flagship state-operated lander
>you’re moving the goalpost
I am setting a boundary, not my fault Russia doesn’t have a private sector. Not my fault Russia larps as the CCCP but can’t do jack shit in space

>>15785624
Explain the axes on this chart to me.

>>15785641
intellectual decline

>>15785662
horizontal axis is the EROI value for various sources of energy. Vertical axis is what percentage of produced energy will have to be spent on making new energy for a certain EROI. As you can see if we get our energy from sources with low EROI we will still have to spend a significant about of this energy on getting new energy sources.

>>15785654
Save it alongside this, which was programmed in with a mallet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqW0LEcTAYg

>>15785511
I know what cycler is.
What I meant is, the Starships that are landing on Mars won't be half empty and half full of empty boxes this way. 6 months worth of food is non-negligible cargo capacity you'd waste if you were just sending the Starships on their own.
Similar thing with radiators and solar panels. You need quite substantial area (think ISS) that would really eat up your useable living volume and wouldn't be all that suitable for deploying on surface. You would also need mechanism to roll and unroll it, which means more complex parts.

>>15785654
Having the private sector do it helps to circumvent this issue. Had conversations with people in the industry who worry about NASA's (barely existent) lunar capabilities and they say it will 100% fail if they go for a big lander. Not to mention it will be costly and kind of pointless. So have commercial (and Artemis) partners do it.

.>>15785388
Astronomers are still at it, they basically want to stop the launch of new satellites so they can keep looking at the sky
----
https://spacenews.com/astronomers-raise-interference-concerns-from-ast-spacemobile-satellite/
Astronomers raise interference concerns from AST SpaceMobile satellite
> HOUSTON — A prototype satellite launched by AST SpaceMobile a year ago is at times one the brightest objects in the night sky, raising new concerns about its impact on astronomy.
> In an advanced copy of a paper to be published by the journal Nature released Oct. 2, astronomers documented several months of observations of BlueWalker 3, a spacecraft launched into low Earth orbit by AST SpaceMobile in September 2022.
> “These results demonstrate a continuing trend towards larger, brighter commercial satellites, which is of particular concern given the plans to launch many more in the coming years,” said Siegfried Eggl of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, one of the authors of the study, in a statement released by the International Astronomical Union Centre for the Protection of the Dark and Quiet Sky from Satellite Constellation Interference, or IAU CPS. That center works to study the impact of satellite constellations on astronomy and methods to mitigate those impacts.
> SpaceX has worked with astronomers on ways to reduce the brightness of its Starlink satellites and signed a coordination agreement with the National Science Foundation (NSF) in January to collaborate on ways to address the brightness of its larger V2 satellites.
> At a Sept. 19 meeting of the Astronomy and Astrophysics Advisory Committee, an NSF official said that the agency was finalizing similar coordination agreements with Amazon and OneWeb for their constellations, and praised the Federal Communications Commission for putting requirements in updated licenses for smaller constellations operated by Iceye and Planet that those companies also coordinate with the NSF.

We should limit the amount of satellites allowed in LEO. I propose each country can get 1 (ONE) satellite per 10 000 000 of it's inhabitants.

China outlines Chang’e-8 resource utilization mission to the lunar south pole,
---
https://spacenews.com/china-outlines-change-8-resource-utilization-mission-to-the-lunar-south-pole/
> BAKU, Azerbaijan — China has laid out details of its planned Chang’e-8 mission to test in-situ resource utilization on the moon, while also opening the project to international cooperation.
> Chang’e-8 is slated to launch in 2028 on a Long March 5 rocket from Wenchang spaceport. It will serve as a basis for China’s future, larger-scale International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) project, China National Space Administration (CNSA) officials stated at the 74th International Astronautical Congress in Baku, Oct. 2.
> The Chang’e-8 lander will carry 10 science payloads with a further four on the rover. The lander will carry landing and topography cameras, a seismometer, moon-based Earth radiometer and multispectral imager, a soft X-ray telescope and other payloads along with the ecosystem and ISRU instruments.
>The rover is equipped with 4 scientific payloads. These include a panoramic camera and lunar penetrating radar, as with rovers from the Chang’e-3 and -4 missions. It will also feature an infrared spectrum mineral analyzer and in-situ lunar sample analysis and storage device.
> The mission will follow Chang’e-7 in 2026. That mission will also target the lunar south pole. Together with Chang’e-8 these missions will lay the groundwork for the grander ILRS project in the 2030s.
>Chang’e-6, a first-ever lunar far side sample return, will launch in the first half of 2024 according to CNSA officials. This will follow the deployment of the Queqiao-2 relay satellite to support the mission.

>>15785698
https://twitter.com/AJ_FI/status/1708826447622615364

> ILRS: CNSA's chief engineer Li Guoping says the Chang'e-8 (lander, rover, robot) lunar South pole landing mission is open to proposals for international cooperation.
> Wang Qiong, deputy Cchief designer of the Chang'e-8 mission, introduces the preliminary landing areas for the mission

>>15785416
>Axiom Hab 1 in late 2026
what's going on? i thought it was supposed to be next year?

>>15785523
nothing from russia about being a member of china's moon base? russia's space program should be doing as many collaborations as it can to keep itself afloat. just look at what nasa is doing for artemis.

https://twitter.com/AJ_FI/status/1708833642967929338
> Dr Zurbuchen slide on CLPS deliveries

Apparently these slides are outdated, X posts say that:
> All dates on the slides on IM or Astrobotics missions (Q1 2023) seem to be outdated,
> This seems to be outdated. The 2nd Firefly and the Draper contract are not included.

>>15785703
They've been saying "late 2025" since last year.

>>15785707
China has had enough of the Russian space program after they killed phobos grunt

>>15785707
haven't seen anything about that yet, not listening to the livestreams about this though just see some posts on X randomyl

https://twitter.com/AJ_FI/status/1709112086192664725/photo/1
> An updated concept design for modular multi-rotary joints space-based solar power from the China Academy of Space Technology.

China has a new powerpoint for space based solar power

>>15785707
they have plans for landers though

https://twitter.com/AJ_FI/status/1709105131759845453/photo/1
> Evolution of Russian lunar plans.

>>15785626
a senior soviet scientist at lomonosov moscow state university blames Rogozin 'killed Russian spaceflight'

>>15785707
https://twitter.com/AJ_FI/status/1708940207351910611

okay seems like China has ejected Russia from its plans altogether

>>15785723
them some thicc bois

>>15785686
That satellite is 6.5 magnitudes brighter than starlink. It is 400 times brighter. SpaceX spent a lot of time and money developing mitigations, so should SpaceMobile. There has to be limits. SpaceX quickly pushed them beyond visual magnitudes. This fucker on the other hand would be one of the brightest objects in the night sky.

>>15785727
its over

>>15785727

>>15785734
>no manned launches in sight
OOF

>>15785729
nigga just build observatories in space

>>15784676
Just testing the waters. Future fines will be much higher.

>>15785740
Nice of SpaceMobile to offer to fund putting LSST in space. I'm sure the cheque is in the post.

>>15785727
China is low key based kek

>>15785750
astronomy funding is going to dry up? just use that which is used for ground observatories to design and build space based observatories assuming Starship works
by the time those plans are done, Starship should be launching regularly
in the mean time, run the ground based observatories as long as you can until they get obsoleted by LEO sat light pollution

>>15785750
LSST will face difficulties due to the number of satellites in orbit

Let's see how knowledgeable /sfg/ is

>>15785096
There is no such thing as a "troon phenotype" because trooning out is the result of brainwashing, not genetics.

>>15785713
https://twitter.com/AJ_FI/status/1709216075257106684

> Ispace aims to launch its Mission 2 lunar lander in 2024. New APEX 1.0 lander for Mission 3 in 2026, as member of Team Draper in NASA CLPS.

>>15785762
some people are more susceptible due to genetic traits

>>15785661
>X axis
Units of energy produced after paying for the energy production process, out of 100 total.
>Y axis
Percentages of energy share, red being energy used to run the energy production system.

Basically you want to be as far to the left as possible on this graph, anything beyond the asymptote on the right can never break even on energy production.

>>15785764
lol

>>15785480
its' not possible to combine digitally, that's only possible for radio telescopes.

>>15785273
Also ground based telescopes have more noise, limiting exposure time.

>>15785760
From left to right (some of these are going to be wrong so, whatever….)
Star, idk, idk, inertial upper stage, electron upper stage?, russian? russian? russian?, centaur, idk, Delta upper stage/SLS block 1, fregat or something?, F9 upper, exploration upper stage, outdated starship render

>>15785677
Starships carrying humans won't carry any bulk cargo that isn't directly supporting human life (ie food). There's no reason to. They are planning to send like 10 cargo Starships per crewed vehicle.

You have to send cargo to the cycler regardless. It makes zero difference if Starship just lands on Mars having used up 6 months worth of its 5 year consumables supply and accesses the cargo of other Starships then, vs topping up that 6 months of stuff from another Starship via a cycler, except in the latter case you have to pay for construction and maintenance of a fucking cycler.

>>15785321
It's one literally mentally ill /sfg/ user shitting on GBT

>>15785777
>They are planning to send like 10 cargo Starships per crewed vehicle.
when was this mentioned?

>>15785780
in his dreams, obviously.

>>15785384
Not me try again

>>15785775
not bad
Star 48, AVUM, Fregat, Inertial Upper Stage, Castor 30XL, Delta K, Blok DM-03, Blok I (Soyuz 2 configuration), Centaur III (SEC), ESC-B, Delta Cryogenic Second Stage (5 meter), Centaur V, Falcon S2, Exploration Upper Stage, BFS

>>15785729
I literally do not care about astronomy. It's even less likely to produce results that are in any way impactful to daily life than modern particle physics research.

>>15785783
Castor FUCK I should have known
And I expected fregat in there somewhere, I just realized I don’t know what it looks like though lol

>>15785770
Isn't that how geometrical super resolution imaging works?

>>15785784
I just hope you're not a religious person then

>>15785786
what do you mean by that? Anyway interferometry is possible with light telescopes but they have to be connected optically so to speak, the alignment has to be very good and it's expensive. With radio telescopes on the other hand you can simply record the signals from multiple radio telescopes and then later combine them in a computer to get a higher resolution.

>>15785757
>space telescopes are too expensive!
So build cheaper space telescopes.
>it's not that easy!!
SpaceX did it with rockets. Falcon 9 was way cheaper than industry standard for its size even before it had a reusable first stage.
>a space telescope isn't a rocket!!!
Correct, it's actually easier. The only reason space telescopes are so expensive is because of industry inertia holding onto mass autism.

>>15785790
It is my understanding that with geometrical super resolution imaging, you combine many photographs in a computer to remove noise.

>>15785760
Who is still out there looking at the 2017 BFR design?

>>15785791
>>>it's not that easy!!
>SpaceX did it with rockets
There's a fundamental difference here: there is money in rocketry but none in telescopes.

Well... not if the telescopes are pointed up...

>>15785793
they liked ITS/BFR's massive (Sea Dragon) size

>>15785793
still makes me laugh how it was called the big fucking rocket. Imagine future historians

reminder that space based visual interferometry is easier than ground based. (since the telescopes don't have to rotate )

>>15785780
>>15785781
One of the IAC talks I think.

>>15785794
I wonder how much secret telescopes cost.

>>15785787
I'm not, but I'm curious what you mean by that

>>15785802
You mean like spooksats? I don’t think there’s such a thing as secret telescopes that look ‘away’ from earth
Either way the answer is $2 bil for the keyhole ones that are basically just earth-watching Hubble

>>15785795
BFR was 9m diameter, only ITS was 12m (rip in piece)

>>15785796
>big fucking
big FALCON rocket

>>15785770
>not possible
Is it though?
>Now Bland-Hawthorn has teamed up with quantum technologist John Bartholomew of the University of Sydney and Matthew Sellars of the Australian National University in Canberra to design optical interferometers that avoid the use of entangled photons and quantum repeaters. The basic idea is simple: Consider two eight-meter telescopes separated by tens of kilometers. The quantum states of the photons collected by each telescope—meaning the amplitude and phase of light as a function of time—are stored in quantum hard drives. Astronomers would physically transport these QHDs—by road, rail or air—to one location, where the quantum states would be read out and made to interfere, generating an interferogram.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/quantum-astronomy-could-create-telescopes-hundreds-of-kilometers-wide/

>>15785797
Yeah if serious mission planners think they can build a gravitational wave detector satellite constellation that works by holding three gold cubes 2.5 million km apart and detecting displacements smaller than a helium atom diameter, we can probably figure out optical space telescope interferometry too.

>>15785757
>just use that which is used for ground observatories
The total NSF budget for astronomy is only about 300 million. Only a fraction of that goes to new facilities. NASA astrophysics plus Roman currently has a budget of 1.9 billion. Even if you completely defunded ground based astronomy it would make fuck all difference because the vast majority of the money goes to space anyway. It just turns into a very small number of facilities. It would take decades just to fund one major space telescope.

>>15785794
There is money for telescopes in space, the problem is that the buyers are accepting the quoted prices of the telescopes they want to buy.
If some entity put out a contract for a space telescope fleet and said "Build and launch ten telescopes of X description and you get paid $1B per launch", someone would bid for that contract & have every incentive to lower their costs to maximize profit. Repeat this a few times and you'll lower the price of space telescopes 20x while increasing the number of active units by a similar factor.

>>15785796
yeah, I think about the old Sumerian dog joke every time somebody important brings up some sort of inside joke or pop-culture trivia.

I like to imagine they will think we invented some sort of spring powered catapult based off a Rogozin's trampoline joke and that some future Schliemann will actually build it to prove it was totally a real thing.

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-musk-kremlin-meme-1831593
Thoughts on nationalizing spacex?
Began as a NASA/DARPA project and will end up in NASA/DARPA's hands.

>>15785825
When I say that there's no money in space telescopes and you say "but what if somebody offered $10 billies for a fleet of them" you're completely missing the point. Who would put up $10B for a fleet of space telescopes in the first place? They'd never make their money back because there's no money in telescopes!

The only reason telescopes get funded is because politicians get annoyed at astronomers whining so much and think giving them another telescope will make them shut up (it never does and they always want another.)

>>15785832
Either he thinks Ukraine is a sideshow and should be let fall because it interferes with and could possibly derail his grand plan or he is a genuine Russian supporter.

>>15785832
>Michael Griffin and Elon Musk hatch a plan to develop massive constellations of military satellites using civilian rocket scientists motivated to work at 200% productivity with the tantalizing reward of colonizing Mars
>Elon Musk becomes the personality around which this drive for Mars is focused, rocket engineers flock to him like moths to a lightbulb, SpaceX booms and accomplishes great things (but not Mars colonization)
fast forward a few years
>Redditors and government bureaucrats (I repeat myself) get mad at Elon Musk for being insufficiently supportive of the current thing
>get him kicked out of SpaceX
>SpaceX loses its civilian fig leaf and now becomes an overt defense contractor
>SpaceX engineers lose their motivating dream of Mars, become apathetic, find other things to do with their lives
>military usefulness of SpaceX crashes
bravo idiots

>>15785797
In some ways yes, not having to deal with atmospheric coherence times. In other ways no, formation flying orders of magnitude better than anyone has demonstrated.
Also note that visible/infrared interferometry is pretty niche. It's mostly limited to looking at single stars.

>>15785815
That's not digital. It also hasn't been demonstrated and may not be practical. Interesting idea though.

>>15785819
ESA are building LISA. LISA is a passive interferometer, it measures the distance very accurately but it doesn't control that distance carefully. ESA are considering a mid-infrared formation flying interferometer (LIFE) for exoplanets in the 2050s. But it's a huge risk technologically, the mission was recommended with the caveat that if the technology is not ready it will be replaced with an infrared Gaia-like mission (no interferometry). So even ESA isn't sure. LIFE would be quite limited, it would not be a general purpose facility. In the mid infrared tolerances are about 10 times easier than visible.

>>15785846
Ukraine war is a prelude to WW3, the plan is to deplete the Russian military in Ukraine so that Russia will be incapable of being a major player in the real war, sparing Europe from the worst of WW3 and allowing the US to focus on the Pacific theater instead of tying up resources to defend Europe at the same time. That's all well and good. It's rational strategy for America if you accept the inevitability of WW3 happening sometime in the next few years. But what if you think WW3 would be a massive disaster for humanity even if this plan works, and that the best way forward is to avert the war entirely? If that is your position, then the Ukraine war is a problem because depleting and destabilizing Russia only makes the entire geopolitical situation more volatile, making WW3 a near certainty. Depleting Russia is a good strategy if you think WW3 is certain to happen, but a bad strategy if you think WW3 might still be avoided entirely.

SpaceX's true raison d'etre is to prevent WW3, not by grinding America's enemies into dust but rather by giving America such an extreme technological and military edge that nobody else will dare to start WW3. This is what Elon Musk refers to when he speaks of SpaceX preventing human extinction, it's the mission he's been committed to for the past two decades. He's firmly in the "prevent WW3" camp, not the "win WW3" camp.

>>15785832
>>15785850
God I hope not. Shuttle Program was an absolute disaster because the Air Force insisted on certain capabilities.

>>15785862
It turns out the military capabilities desired perfectly align with the capabilities of the rockets SpaceX has been developing. Reusable rocket booster for launching massive numbers of satellites into LEO for a reasonable amount of money. This is precisely what they've been creating.

>>15785624
>nuclear
>not mentioned at all

>>15785626
I knew it, Ivan Vodkavich fat-fingered the command.

>>15785696

>>15785862
>NASA administrator Michael D. Griffin argued in a 2007 paper that the Saturn program, if continued, could have provided six crewed launches per year – two of them to the Moon – at the same cost as the Shuttle program, with an additional ability to loft infrastructure for further missions: If we had done all this, we would be on Mars today, not writing about it as a subject for "the next 50 years." We would have decades of experience operating long-duration space systems in Earth orbit, and similar decades of experience in exploring and learning to utilize the Moon
Thoughts?

>>15785854
I was thinking two telescopes connected with a long boom.

>>15785866
Nuclear has either very high EROI or very low EROI depending who you ask

>>15785872
>no trace of any epoxy or any other patching material
>a little sliver of metal with paint on it, inside the hole
>that sliver would have been removed by the patching material, had such a patch existed then failed
>therefore the pre-flight patch never existed
This hole was not patched prior to the photograph being taken. And the spacecraft was not leaking air when it first got to space. Therefore the hole was drilled in space.


>that copypasta about this incident that gets posted on 4chan all the time
Filled with too many obvious discrepancies and nonsensical claims to be real. Obvious fictional larp written up by an idiot. Nevertheless, the evidence of the hole itself remains.

>>15785833
You fucking dumbass I'm talking about a hypothetical where the guy who decides what the next big next space telescope will look like says "fuck you we're making cheaper telescopes".

>>15785846
There are an infinite array of positions that he could hold and post that meme.

>>15785854
soon

>>15785727
вce кoнчeнo

Does someone know when an observation like this will happen? Seems feasible to me.

>>15785886
Nuclear EROI is at minimum better than wind. Some claim that future breeder designs with continuous fuel reprocessing could achieve EROI factors as high as 1000, but again those are claims.

>>15785886
>I was thinking two telescopes connected with a long boom.
That simplifies things but it's very limited. To do good imaging you need lots of measurements at different angles and separations. So the telescopes would have to be on rails or something. On the Earth interferometers benefit from the rotating Earth which changes the angle and projected baseline. A multi element array would be much faster because they can simultaneously sample more baselines.

>>15785899
>the contrast of that input image
Why don't they try running it with more realistic inputs.

>>15785902
If anything I think breeder reactors will have a lower EROI as I've heard reprocessing the spent nuclear fuel is very expensive

>>15785899
good luck. we couldnt even see pluto clearly until we got near it.

>>15785891
Holes have two sides, anon. The epoxy was squished into the hole on the outer side. After a few weeks it shrank enough to simply pop out due to air pressure. I've had that happen with hot glue, when the temperature goes down it shrinks enough to eventually come loose.

>>15785760
>Star
>Briz (?)
>Fregat
>Inertial upper stage
>Castor
>Agena (?)
>Block D
>Soyuz
>Centaur (?)
>N-1's upper stage (going by diameter)
>ICPS
>Saturn-IV
>Falcon 9's upper stage
>Exploration upper stage
>BFR

>>15785912
>The epoxy was squished into the hole on the outer side. After a few weeks it shrank enough to simply pop out due to air pressure. I've had that happen with hot glue, when the temperature goes down it shrinks enough to eventually come loose.
It would take that sliver of painted metal with it.

>>15785881
I wonder how cost-effective Saturn V derived launchers would've been actually made.

>>15785899
Not exactly an exoplanet, but it was done with Pluto before Hew Horizons

>>15785909
True if you're reprocessing solid fuel ceramics and packaging them inside engineered reactor grade zirconium bundles with tight tolerances. Not so much if you're just pulling fission products out of solution in a molten salt fuel loop using electrochemical cells.

>>15785919
>>15785911
>The Hubble raw images are a few pixels wide. But through a technique called dithering, multiple, slightly offset pictures can be combined through computer-image processing to synthesize a higher-resolution view than could be seen in a single exposure. This series of pictures took four years and 20 computers operating continuously and simultaneously to accomplish.
Doesn't seem to be the same method described here
>>15785899

>>15785760
Hear me out: a hybrid Star

>>15785916
>implying that's not a reflection of the camera flash

>>15785899
Well definitely not with the next generation of telescopes and those are like 15 years away anyway. Come back to us in the late 2050s

>>15785920
>Not so much if you're just pulling fission products out of solution in a molten salt fuel loop using electrochemical cells.
Has this ever been demonstrated? I've read this is the hard part with the proposed liquid salt breeder reactors.

>>15785920
oldnuke sounds a lot like oldspace

>>15785906
That's not the input image, that's just a map of the Earth to compare to the map derived from the actual input, which is just the brightness of the planet measured through time.

>>15785881
I buy his arguments. Saturn Vs to launch space stations and cheaper launchers to lift uprated Apollo capsules with mini-Service Modules for LEO would have been better than the shittle.

too many power point presentations lately, lets get some actual hardware news

>>15785903
just rotate it around the center of the boom. Anyway I changed my opinion I prefer giant inflatable telescopes now.

>>15785936
power point is what you are going to get

>>15785933
>shittle
looks like someone needs to change your diaper little boy. It's hilarious how zoomers manage to shit all over their own credibility by denigrating the worlds first and best reusable space plane while worshiping an inferior version being developed by elon musk.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbWrzpDmH0w
>even our man Cody is getting cucked by FAA
Total Bureaucrat Death

>>15785941
>triggered by "shittle"
you have to go back

>>15785926
They did a bunch of experiments at Oak Ridge back in the day. Getting the fission products to plate out is easy, in fact getting them to NOT plate out in the reactor plumbing was more of a concern.

Air Force Research Lab awards design contracts for nuclear powered spacecraft, Artemis Accords signatories seek to boost transparency and safety in lunar exploration, Scottish satellite builder moves into a new factory
---
https://spacenews.com/air-force-research-lab-awards-design-contracts-for-nuclear-powered-spacecraft/
> WASHINGTON — Intuitive Machines, Lockheed Martin and Westinghouse Government Services won contracts from the Air Force Research Laboratory to advance technologies for nuclear powered space vehicles.
> The project is part of an AFRL Space Vehicles Directorate program called Joint Emergent Technology Supplying On-orbit Nuclear Power, or JETSON.
---
https://spacenews.com/artemis-accords-signatories-seek-to-boost-transparency-and-safety-in-lunar-exploration/
> BAKU, Azerbaijan — A working group of nations signed up to the Artemis Accords aim to increase transparency and safety of civil lunar exploration missions.
> "As a result of careful considerations, signatories discussed an initial set of mission information items that should be disclosed to avoid interference on the surface.”
---
https://europeanspaceflight.com/alba-orbital-move-into-new-pocketqube-manufacturing-facility/
> Alba Orbital Move into new PocketQube Manufacturing Facility
> Alba Orbital was founded in 2012 with two aims: to maximize the value of PocketQube satellites and to offer an Earth observation data service. To date, the company has launched 31 satellites and begun to offer an early access programme for its NightLight service, which offers “dependable high-resolution night-time imagery.” The company also offers ground station services, picosatellite deployers, and a launch broker service.

NASA and SpaceX

>>15785941
nice bait.

>>15785956
nuclear reactorsfor power in space is such a no-brainer. I will never forgive the anti-nuclear crowd for their crimes.

>>15785957
>Dating Falcon 9 and not Falcon Heavy
Checks out. Even his taste in waifus reflects mass autism

>>15785968
FH is too fat.

>>15785950
I remember watching a video of his some 6 years ago where he tried to build a liquid fueled rocket engine. Thanks for posting this.

>>15785956
So between DRACO and JETSON which do you guys think will make orbit first? DRACO had NERVA to base itself on while JETSON has SNAP and decades of SMR research

Raptor 4 Specs:
Engine Mass - 78kg
Combustion Chamber Pressure - 2500 bar
Max Thrust -336MN
TWR - 440000
Isp - 327 seconds
The best part is no part™
https://twitter.com/FelixSchlang/status/1709235094584516956?t=Bg0PhzEFo3TfGLQrOCpoRA&s=19

>>15785937
Both kinds of ideas are being worked on for a proposed far infrared probe observatory. SALTUS is a 20m inflatable, but even at these very long wavelengths it requires adaptive optics to correct the wobbly mirror.

https://cor.gsfc.nasa.gov/copag/AAS_Jan2023/presentations/SALTUS_Intro_9Jan23_AAS_v2.pdf

It's quite unlikely to be selected this time, but it will stimulate a bit of development of the concept.

>asked for too much pay for the nasa job during negotiations
>radio silence from them
it's ogre

>>15785977
>FelixSchlang
in the garbage it goes

>>15785981
You realize NASA jobs are on the government civil service payscale right
You don't negotiate dollars, you get a spot in a pay grade

>>15785955
What's the difference between a breeder reactor and a normal reactor where the fuel is periodically reprocessed to remove the neutron poisons?

>>15785981
White sands facility?

>>15785981
What's the point of working at NASA nowadays? I bet every private company pays more.

>>15785930
This image >>15785899 clearly labels the top map as "INPUT"
The second map in that image was generated from the first map.

SpaceX has lot of knowledge on how to move sats into different orbit with different techniques now due to their various experiments with Starlink deployment. Not only from Sat themselves but also from rocket launch optimizations.

>>15785998
the brightness from the first image is taken and that's the input

>>15785999
oh, okay

So Northrup Grumman is out in orbital commercial station, BO is out, Sierra Nevada is out.

Just Vast/Axiom are the only real thing?

>>15786001
Yeah, that's what I said. They didn't use realistic brightness data as their input, their input data had extremely unrealistic contrast between land and ocean. Does the output still looks so impressive if they feed realistic brightness data into their system? I doubt it.

>>15786003
And Nanoracks >>15785416

>>15785999
Yes yes, but did you hear how good ULA is at putting sats in orbit?

>>15786003
Axiom being a bunch of ex-NASA people who worked on the ISS is probably the only reason they haven't bailed.

>>15786013
Actually thinking about it, between Rocket Lab, Maxar, Axiom and SpaceX I have enough data points to draw a line. If you're in the space business purely to make money, you'll eventually fail Boeing, Rocketdyne, and Blue Origin style. You need something else, something personal, to keep going when the MBAs want to pack it in.

>>15786005
I don't see why this would be unrealistic. The planet is sharp but because the resolution of the telescope is low all the telescope gets in an average brightness of all the surfaces of the planet.

>>15786018
Rocket lab success rate is absolute garbage. They're at 90% rate. Thats the Russian proton level or Ariane level. LMAO.

nanoracks-axiom co-orbital stations

>>15786020
>the telescope gets in an average brightness of all the surfaces of the planet.
Yes, and the average difference in brightness for the real earth has far less contrast than this input brightness data.

>>15785988
A breeder takes a non fissile material, like U-238, and exposes it to neutrons to transmute it into a fissile material like Pu-239. The reactor is fueled by the material it breeds while operating, in this case Pu-239.
A reactor that periodically gets poisons removed from its fuel load, but otherwise gets fueled with a fissile material, is not a breeder.
Basically, if the material you mine and ship to the reactor is the same material that powers the nuclear reaction, it's not a breeder.

In molten fuel breeder designs, the breeding process takes place in a jacket surrounding the reactor core. The fuel is removed from the jacket tank through the same process that removes fission products from the core. The separated fuel gets drip-fed into the core loop. Fission products are continuously removed from the core loop. This process is sustainable indefinately so long as you continue to add breeding material to the jacket tank.

>>15786003
BO is a wildcard, spacenews.com reported that they want to send up a LIFE habitat pathfinder space station so they may be going their own route

Vast will happen, Axiom too. Starlab is a wildcard, gravitics is sus

>>15784529
12 new American envelopes from 1960-1992, all envelopes are First Day of Issue (FDI)
Also updated some bits and files, now stamp prices are included with envelopes and FDI envelopes are marked

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1mfTItKVUP-PKlwUiCK13AWwRKkgsHWtn?usp=drive_link

Would this work (assuming money is not a problem)

>>15786051
Some neat 80's stylized art from NASA's graphical golden age

>>15786055
I'll also be uploading closeup scans of the stamps separately for the stamp file

Any news from Vast Space? They were supposed to present their roadmap at the Azerbaijan conference today

>>15786054
Does Russia still have problems with non-spherical tanks?

how does putting a couple of landers next to each other count as a base

>>15786058
this is the last they posted ~7 hours ago.

https://twitter.com/vast/status/1709147905658093767
>We are exhibiting at @Iac2023 this week — be sure to stop by our booth in the Exhibition Center (#312)! #IAC2023

HOLY FUCKING KINO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbWrzpDmH0w
cody made a fucking sodium metal + water rocket

>>15786032
true that, I still think with less contrast you could get a good image. however changing cloud patterns present a bigger problem. Cheers

>>15786043
>In molten fuel breeder designs, the breeding process takes place in a jacket surrounding the reactor core. The fuel is removed from the jacket tank through the same process that removes fission products from the core. The separated fuel gets drip-fed into the core loop. Fission products are continuously removed from the core loop. This process is sustainable indefinately so long as you continue to add breeding material to the jacket tank.
Thanks for the breakdown. So why has nobody ever built such a reactor?

>>15786063
ARCA, hire this man

>>15786072
Nuclear proliferation fears (ie normie bullshit)
If you can breed fissile material that's chemically distinct from nonfissile material, you can made bomb grade fuel pretty easily. No physical isotopic enrichment of any kind.
Problem with this logic is that a pile of natural uranium metal bricks stacked with graphite bricks can form a self sustaining nuclear reaction, and will breed a useful amount of plutonium. Therefore if there actually was this serious risk that someone would use a breeder reactor to make a bomb, they'd be doing it today. Besides, a breeder cycle reactor for power production would be a secure facility with armed guards that gets nonfissile material shipped in and flasks of fission products shipped out, so it's not like someone's gonna be able to hop a fence and steal some fissile fuel. There wouldn't be a significant mass of fissile fuel outside of the reactor anyway, and if you somehow tried to steal that shit you'd definitely fucking die (either from the dose rates or more likely from hot lead ripping your organs to pieces).

>>15786063
>he still wears the copper chainmail
incredibly based

>>15785850
oh it's you again griffin schizo
can't wait for spacex to colonize mars for your retarded as schizo feverdream to be proven wrong

>>15786079
Looks pretty bad until you realize that visualization exhaggerates the scale of debris so that each piece is roughly the size of O'ahu

>>15786072
>So why has nobody ever built such a reactor?

>>15786092
>can't wait for spacex to colonize mars
Nothing would please me more. I just don't think it's going to happen.

>>15786096
you can have doubts without spinning yarns about grand conspiracies.

>>15786094
Bro has been in hospice care for months and just turned 99, that dose he absorbed cleaning up NRX has been doing him good

Japan conducting studies for reusable next-gen rocket, SpaceX providing Starlink services to DoD under ‘unique terms and conditions’
---
https://spacenews.com/japan-conducting-studies-for-reusable-next-gen-rocket/
> The launcher will be designed jointly by JAXA and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI). It is to be reusable while also increasing payload capability and decreasing launch cost.
> “According to the basic plan on space policy, JAXA started research on a new generation rocket which has a function of reusability of the first stage with MHI,” JAXA Public Affairs department told SpaceNews via email.
> The fuel choice for the new rocket is however being studied. “Liquid methane is one of the candidates as well as liquid hydrogen,” JAXA said.
> The basic plan says the rocket will be ready for the 2030s as part of its space transportation plans. The project could potentially be expanded to support full reuse and human spaceflight.
----
https://spacenews.com/spacex-providing-starlink-services-to-dod-under-unique-terms-and-conditions/
> Under a $70 million task order awarded by the Space Systems Command, ‘SpaceX is providing a best effort and global subscription for various land, maritime, stationary and mobility platforms and users’
> WASHINGTON — A $70 million contract the U.S. Space Force awarded to SpaceX for Starlink internet services includes “unique terms and conditions” not included in previous commercial contracts.
> The Starlink service provided under this agreement is known as Starshield, which is SpaceX’s brand name for its military product line.
> “The task order for Starshield services is provided by the Starlink satellite constellation but is differentiated from the commercial Starlink service based on unique Department of Defense terms and conditions that are not found in commercial service contracts,” said the spokesperson.

>>15786051
>>15786055
Vgh, so fucking awesome

>>15786099
I can spin yarns about grand conspiracies if I want to. Secret government endeavors do actually exist so spare me exaggerated incredulity.

I am torn. I wanted Webb to fail, out of principal of NASA needing to learn a lesson about overly complex and expensive shit. But it worked flawlessly and it keeps finding interesting shit, so. Was it worth it in the end?

>>15784529
Gonna post 2 of the 8 new stamps which came with the envelopes
First is the Pioneer 10 stamp's closeup, basic but pretty

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ZvR2fmPrjmi1_OrXPzmbsRcFEm-rmQSV?usp=drive_link

>>15786112
so why was Musk picked in particular?
I just don't think the government is that competent, it doesn't pass occams razor

>>15786115
It's an invasion