/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15966321
How can we colonize this moon? It is in the radiation belt and large scale tunneling will be required to study the all important ocean, but at those depths theres nothing to gain from solar and we will need a power source to both farm and have light

>>15966326
how much radiation is on the surface?

>tfw no spacemommy gwynne shotwell gf

Tune in to Hear NASA Discuss Artemis Moon Mission Plans

NASA will hold a media teleconference today at 1:30 p.m. EST to provide an update on the agency’s lunar exploration plans for the benefit of all under Artemis.

Audio of the briefing will stream live on NASA’s website.

In addition to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, agency participants will include:

NASA Associate Administrator Jim Free
Catherine Koerner, associate administrator, Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate
Amit Kshatriya, deputy associate administrator, Moon to Mars Program, Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate

The following partner representatives also will be available to answer questions during the call:

Mike Lauer, RS-25 Program director, Aerojet Rocketdyne
Russell Ralston, vice president and Extravehicular Activity Program manager, Axiom Space
Dave Leeth, mobile launcher 2 deputy project manager and principal vice president, Bechtel
John Couluris, senior vice president of lunar permanence and Human Landing System Program manager, Blue Origin
Dave Dutcher, vice president and Space Launch System Program manager, Boeing
Peggy Guirgis, general manager, Space Systems, Collins Aerospace
Lorna Kenna, vice president and Consolidated Operations, Management, Engineering and Test Program manager, Jacobs
Tonya Ladwig, vice president human space exploration and Orion Program manager, Lockheed Martin
Chris Coker, vice president for civil programs, Maxar
Mark Pond, senior director of NASA programs, Northrop Grumman
Jessica Jensen, vice president of customer operations and integration, SpaceX
Daniel Neuenschwander, director of human and robotic exploration, ESA (European Space Agency)

Through Artemis, the agency will establish a long-term presence at the Moon for scientific exploration with our commercial and international partners, learn how to

>>15966326
>we will need a power source to both farm and have light

>>15966335
Nuclear is too dangerous to have constructed by colonists on site as well as without a large team backing them, and fusion is a total meme. As much as I like fission for large scale industrial societies, its just not suited for use by small groups. The only thing I can think of is nuclear submarines which I think use nuclear reactors but not sure, even then wouldnt you need shit tons of liquid water that isnt close to if not actually freezing?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJVa0z5kZAk

talking about artemis situation

>>15966341
>Nuclear is too dangerous to have constructed by colonists on site
That's where SMR comes into the equation, the entire nuclear industry is moving towards standardized prefabs

NASA announces artemis II gonna be delayed to 2025 and its gonna be a uncrew mission

>>15966346
No, not yet...

>>15966346
IT'S OVER

>>15966326
Radiation levels are at about 540rem per day. So 18 hours on the surface should be enough to ensure a painful death.

In a submarine tho...

SEPTEMBER 2025 ARTEMIS II

FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK

ARTEMIS IV SEPTEMBER 2028

WHAT THE FUCK WHAT THE FUCK

>>15966346
Is that SpaceX fault somehow

Artemis II delayed to September 2025, Artemis III September 2026, Artemis IV 2028

>>15966346
>its gonna be a uncrewed mission
What's the fucking point

> we are adjusting the timeline of artemis 2 to September 2025 and September 2026 for artemis 3
>artemis 4 remains on track for September 2028

>>15966351
Yes. SpaceX makes NASA employees anxious.

>just think back 60 years ago when...
THAT'S ALL WE EVER THINK ABOUT YOU DECREPIT FOSSIL

>>15966354
>1 year gap between AIII and AIV
Liars

There will never be an Artemis 5.

How do we unfuck Artemis?

artemis II still crewed

>>15966362
cancel it

talking about Starship now
>we are looking at our Starship progress, we are looking at our spacesuits

"After our completely successful Artemis I flight, we have decided to repeat the flight because we found problems."

>>15966361
Im sure they gonna cancel it after artemis II, MAYBE if were lucky aftes artemis III

>>15966363
Dream on:

Artemis 2 for Sept 2025
Artemis 3 for Sept 2026 (first crew)
Artemis 4 for Sept 2028

>>15966369
Eric updated:

A II is crewed also.

This thread is full of whining zoomer newfags apparently. The first crewed landing wont occur until 2029 at the earliest, sorry.

>I’ve done around 3 dozen first flights. This was amongst the smoothest ever.
>smoothest
https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1744683013768638681
Tory confirms that total peregrine death was not their fault after all

>>15966371
and 3 is still to the surface
I can live with that

VALVES

>>15966351
First of all, SpaceX launches within a week of the FAA granting a launch license every time. Musk is going to throw whatever he has on hand on to the pad and launch, because he knows that it is faster to iterate that way.

If NASA wanted to they could have pulled some strings in the FAA to get the environmental review, and the investigations, through the system. If you don't think the largest aviation research body in the world doesn't have connections to the FAA, you may wanna get your fucking head checked.

The reason why they didn't is simple. SLS has always been delayed, and always will be behind schedule. It's not that easy in cost-plus contractery. On a Gantt chart, the critical path always has been, and always will be SLS.

But why not help SpaceX anyway? Simple, Musk is conveniently placed as the perfect scapegoat for the general public and politicians, as NASA can simply point at starship 'exploding' as proof that they are behind. If NASA had excercised its power to get SpaceX through the development process, they would now be on this livestream explaining why SLS is delayed for another time. Congress won't touch SpaceX after the awarding of the contract (see the military industrial complex)

>>15966373
This, and its gonna be the chinese

>>15966377
>3 is still to the surface

Not without Gateway, space suits and everything else. And that assumes A II works.

It's never going to happen.

>>15966371
>>15966377
>>15966369
>>15966350
Sucks ass and SLS should be taken out back and be shot, but why are any of you surprised??? We all knew 2024 wasn't gonna happen lmao.

Berger had it on the money in 2022 as usual >https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/12/artemis-i-has-finally-launched-what-comes-next/
>Realistically, a follow-up to Artemis I is probably at least two years away. Most likely, the Artemis II mission will not happen before early 2025, although NASA is not giving up hope on launching humans into deep space in 2024.

>>15966387
>why are any of you surprised?

Zero surpised here.

>everything is ready
>see you in 2025

12 MONTHS FOR GATEWAY TO MAKE IT TO NRHO

CNSA is accepting proposals for international payloads to go up on the Chang'e 8 lunar exploration mission.
>scientific objectives include exploring lunar physics, studying geological profiles, observing Earth's atmosphere and magnetic field from the Moon, analyzing lunar samples, and conducting ecological experiments in a closed lunar environment.
>collaborators can utilize up to 200kg of mass resources provided by the lander, including interfaces, separation or release devices, and cables.
>the collaboration can be at the system level, where projects can detach from the lander after reaching the lunar surface, or at the individual equipment level, with projects remaining attached to the lander platform.
>priority is given to projects with the capability to interact with the Chang'e-8 mission on the lunar surface or in lunar orbit, lunar rovers with abilities such as object manipulation and soil movement

HALO+PPE FUCKING DELAYED TO 2026 PROBABLY

>partnered with BO for HLS
Didn't BO sue them repeatedly until congress threw them a freebie

knower here
spacex is going to lose the HLs contract

>>15966393
SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP

NASA REQUESTED SPECIFIC CARGO VARIANTS OF HLS FROM BOTH SPACEX AND BO!

>>15966398
They weren't thrown a freebie, they clawed a freebie from SpaceX's hands by using every political connection they could muster.

> Amit Kshatriya, deputy associate administrator at NASA, also says Gateway will not launch in October 2025. That schedule will also be "updated" to give commercial partners more time.

Whenever you get around to it.

SHUT THE FUCK UP INCEL CHUDS NASA IS MAKING THE CORRECT CHOICE STOP BEING BIGOTED YOU FUCKING MAGATS SCAMLON HUSK IS THE ONE THAT CAUSED ALL THIS

>>15966404
Everything with NASA is delays, delays, delays we're pushing this back, we're pushing that back

FUCK

The Right Stuff (tm)

Hello thanks for taking my question, anon here from /sfg/: Do you fear an angry mob of space enthusiasts lynching the lot of you for this insult? Followup question, what would you want on your tombstone? Thanks again

Jim Free subtly hinting at Artemis III not being the landing potentially

>Lunar Orbit a-La apollo 8???

>>15966407
>fake black axiom suits

>>15966412
lel

> Q: Marcia Dunn: With the extra time any thought of an orbital mission, and any chance of shoe horining another mission in between Artemis 2&3 - Free: No change in the mission profile, we're going to learn form these missions, planning on 3 being the landing.

>>15966380
>>15966387
Where exactly is SLS cited as a cause of this delay? I only read about Orion, ESM, suits, ground systems and HLS. Is there more?

Whats gonna happen:

Artemis II: 2026
Artemis III: cancelled in 2027

Spacebros... I think China is our last hope...

LMAO BILL FUCKING INTERVENED LOL

> shatriya - life support system - during acceptance for #Artemis III we noticed motor valve failures - the passed acceptance for Artemis II but not for Artemis III - there is a design flaw in control circuit. - especially CO2 scrubber.

Again with the valves?

> Kshatriya - environment for #Artemis Orion separation during escape mode - found a few cases where there could be electrical system battery performance issues.

*zap*

>>15966420
>HOW. MANY.
>"uhh i don't know"

>>15966407
>2024
Not so fast, safety is our number one priority!
>1969
Ayo here is a trillion tons of kerosene to sit on, we hope you don't run out of oxygen or waste one percent of your precious delta v or you will all die agonizing deaths lol! Gotta beat the Soviets somehow!

Fuck this timeline

>>15966422
Bill was having none of that fucking corporate redirection lmaoo

> Kshatriya mentions #Artemis I heat shield - it met requirements & performed perfect but it had unexpected phenomena that we need to understand - saw off-nominal recession of some char that came off the shield that we did not expect - pieces were liberated - did not expect that

Perfect "but" isn't a thing.

Tony just posted this on X
Pretty interesting, basically Starship is incapable of flying any Vulcan payloads because it's too low energy

>>15966425
"It went fine except for the pieces that came off"

>>15966425
>picked up some wind after the 2nd skip maneuver which liberated some charred chunks
>spooks NASA so much they delay Artemis II

I swear to fucking god, NASA's obsession with absolute perfection and matching the models 100% is so fucking annoying

>>15966426
I didn't know ULA were planning a Sea Dragon scaled rocket.

>>15966426
Holy fuck, how many times Vulcan is bigger than starship

>>15966430
They have to. When you run on so little operational freedom, you have to try and hit 100% at all costs.

>"The astronauts would have experienced perturbations ranging from minor discomfort to complete annihilation"

>>15966432
Anon that rocket is 170km tall that is not Sea Dragon suze

>>15966426
Starship's good to 20 tons to GTO (but nothing to Geo direct due to high stage mass), so I wouldn't say "incapable."

>>15966434
How hard is it to figure out the wind did it

>>15966426
SMART >>>>>> whatever tf space-x is shitting out. We've known this for DECADES and it's PROVEN

>>15966412
> Asked if #Artemis II can do a Apollo 8 lunar orbit thing? @JimFree - no Artemis II mission stays the same.

So II is I, but this time you get to watch astronauts die.

>>15966435
If ULA builds a 170km tall Vulcan, I take everything back I said about them.

>>15966437
Starship 3rd stage (Mueller stage) will kill Vulcan outright

>>15966426
>muh energy
How many satellites went beyond LEO last year?

>>15966437
>nothing to Geo direct due to high stage mass

Yes, because there's no possible way that 20 tons could contain a kick stage to get to GEO.

>>15966445
Orbital refueling also works if they manage to get the per-launch costs low enough.
>>15966446
There are obvious ways to optimize for a Starship mission, but 20 tons GTO is the SpaceX offered figure.

>These are the date's we've contracted for and We're going to hold them accountable

70km tall fully reusable Starship of 170km tall Vulcan?

>>15966449
The Shuttle did kick stage launches to GEO+ It's not some unproven tech level.

>>15966453
The Vulcan would be putting up entire O'Neil cylinders at a time.

> Jessica #spacex says test flight to the Moon in 2025.

>Jessica Jensen of SpaceX says that hardware for Starship flight three will be ready in January, and that the company expects to receive an FAA license in February.

>>15966454
No, it's not, it's just a budget question. Which is cheaper? An integrated third stage as part of the payload, or orbital refueling, and how do the mission risks compare? This doesn't have an obvious answer yet.

>>15966426
>calling Starship low energy ala Trump

LOCKHEED WOMAN DOWNPLAYING

LMAOOO

>>15966459
>FAA delaying again
GOD DAMN IT THROW THEM ALL IN THE PISSLOCKS

The best part is no part
remove the government
Yes, from the Earth

>>15966461
I seriously doubt orbital refueling will be used for GTO. It will most definetly will be a kickstage. Hell you could just put a Falcon 9 upper stage on there and it would work fine.

We really should just get rid of NASA as a organization all together.

>>15966459
If IFT3 goes perfectly and there is no investigation, does that mean the FAA will be able to give them a new license in <30 days?

>>15966459
>Jessica Jensen of SpaceX
shes a smokeshow holy shit

>september 2028
yeah the chinese will be on the moon before us lmfao

>>15966474
SpaceX blondes!

>>15966426
this is their only cope, so of course they are going to continue using it
the fact that starship architecture is designed around orbital refilling is of no concern

what are reasons for the delay?
and is artemis 2 really uncrewed?

>>15966480
muh heatshield didn't deteriorate to 100% predicted specifications
no

>>15966426
>low energy: rockets only 70km tall
>high energy: rockets 170km tall

>it will take exactly one year to put gorilla glue on the heatshield so it doesn't break into pieces
If only you knew how bad things really are

>>15966461
>Which is cheaper?

>Inertial Upper Stage cost is assumed to be $4.3 million per launch whenever it is used as a kick stage.

Then year dollars. And there are cheaper kicks.

TLDR SpaceX is the only thing that has their shit together. Get rid of everyone else.

>>15966489
Think of how much faster they'd go if they didn't have to keep getting government permission to do their job.

Artemis is synonymous with disappointment and delay

>SpaceX lady explaining to everyone they're building out the fucking Starship factory so launch cadence is not a big deal

Glad she mentioned that, people still don't understand it

>>15966491
I don't mean just the government. ULA, BO, Firefly, NASA, etc. get rid of them all.

>>15966493
When she said '10 launches -- maybe more" to cert Starship, you could see the balls retract on the NASA drones.

>>15966493
when old space thinks of "factory" its just a location to house their bespoke rocket manufacturing with output of once a year, not a mass production facility

>>15966342
SpaceX representative portion starts at 43:55
I only listened to about 5mins of it at the start, had to do something else

https://www.youtube.com/live/ZJVa0z5kZAk?si=YvkkL1CppEs3y13T&t=2635

>>15966503
> we have achieved almost all of the complex parts already on our operational programs
>now it is just about piecing them together for Starship
> docked with ISS over 30 times with dragon -> Starships docking together
>launching missions with close proximity to achieve rapid refueling
> with falcon 9 we can launch missions within few hours each other, same pad within days
>cryogenic propellant part of it, we are working with ground tests right now
> on the flight test we will lean how much propellant is transferred and then iterate on the next flight to determine how many missions we need

>>15966467
based and Mileipilled

>>15966508
>Bill Nelson: the question was, how many fuel transfers?
> SpaceX: it will be roughly ten, would be my rough guess right now, but it could be lower depending on how the first flight test goes or it could be a little bit higher

>>15966488
Most of those stages are quite light. You'd need something bigger to do the job on a heavy satellite, and a Falcon 9 second stage is too heavy: it uses up the entire payload margin of a Starship.

Why doesn't SpaceX train their own astronauts?

uncrewed Starship moon landing targeted for 2025

>>15966515
they don't need to

NASA Artemis update + SpaceX massive progress:
>July 2024 Artemis II
>Novermber 2024 SpaceX Propellant Depot launch
>July 2025 SpaceX HLS Uncrewed demo
>November 2025 Artemis III
>December 2025 Lunar Gateway PPE+HALO launch on Falcon Heavy

>>15966519
Why not? Better than to rely on NASA for them.

in 2028 they'll be complaining that spacex is sending tourists on lunar flybys while nasa is still waiting for their first lunar landing

>>15966523
kek

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/01/daily-telescope-the-milky-way-above-one-of-my-favorite-places-on-earth/

>>15966523
By 2028, NASA shouldn't exist as an organization.

> If we had crew on Artemis-1, the lunar return velocities would have been maximal
>they would have not sensed any disturbance inside the vehicle
>there would have been any impact on crew safety

>>15966536
>however we're delaying Artemis II anyways because we have become autistic perfectionist control freaks slaved to our models and theories

>>15966512
If an IUS can kick a TDRS or a probe to Jupiter, it can handle a "heavy" sat.

>>15966541
IUS is not available. You have your choice of Casters, Stars, or repurposing a second stage from another rocket.

>>15966474
Yes, but they will die in luna orbit when trans earth injection fails.

Screenshot this

>>15966488
Do solids offer a better "dV per dollar" compared to liquid kick stages? Why use one over the other?

>>15966474
Isn't the Chinese manned landing planned for 2030 or later?

>>15966551
It offers more work per tax dollar in Utah.

>>15966474
>delay SpaceX by 2 years for (((environmental concerns)))
>blame SpaceX

>>15966551
Solids have been seen as cheaper in the past due to solid fuel propulsion engineers not going into hibernation after 1979 like their liquid fuel cousins.

Cost plus contracts and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race

>>15966559
I hope the people responsible get whats coming at some point

>>15966426
>>15966432
Fixed that for him

>>15966545
Oh, is a kick stage an exotic technology that can't be recreated?

>>15966515
Private crews on the Inspiration4 were trained by SpaceX team. They can make this more streamlined when there are more demands, but for now, they're just interested in simple air plane like no-training

>>15966566
When we're talking about old space products that have been retired, you're talking, at minimum, an eight figure development program because they don't know how to do it for less. Refueling Starships in orbit will most assuredly be less expensive than that.

>the thing we need is prop transfer capability, there is no minimum number of flight tests necessary before non-crewed demo landing on the moon for Starship
> we are going to execute as many as possible and iterate along the way
>the prop transfer flight is really the main one
>what has really been happening during the last few years is building the machine that is building the machine
> we have been building all the infrastructure and factories so Starship has a high production rate right out of the gate, capable of reuse and high launch rate
> all of that is going to help us with prop transfer flight, uncrewed demo and finally the crewed flight
>it has really taken us a long time setting up infrastructure, but now that we are in flight test mode there is no bare minimum of flights, as many as we can get to iterate faster, but really it is prop transfer capability and then the uncrewed mission

Anyone else genuinely excited to see bugmen on the moon?

>>15966426
Is that including orbital refueling?

>>15966573
>>it has really taken us a long time setting up infrastructur
TANK FARM

STILL NOT DONE

AAAAAA

>>15966385
Gateway was never part of A3.

damn that call was actually pretty great from a starship perspective, it seems to be along pretty well and they will start spamming test flights as much as possible
so lots of flights to see
dont really give a shit about artemis, its DOA pointless shit anyway, I just hope NASA isn't going to block SpaceX from doing crew stuff just because Artemis is delayed (such as Dear Moon, Polaris mission with transfer from a Dragon to Starship) and stop them from landing uncrewed test flights on Mars
after SpaceX gets the prop transfer tested and working, shouldn't they be able to start prepping for the next mars transfer window as well and send some uncrewed Starships there? the limiting factor here might be launch licenses from boca chica, how big of a problem is the amendment from 5 to N going to be?

>>15966582
Issacman will be the first humans to ride Starship.

If NASA wants to slow down SpaceX, thats their politics.

>>15966574
kind of, let the space race begin in earnest

>>15966551
you don't need to modify ground equipment to fuel a solid kick stage

>>15966574
Yes, if only to put the blame on the stupid beurocrats with an axe to grind against SpaceX/Musk because he doesn't subscribe their marxism.

>>15966555
afaik its 2028 or 2029

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/01/we-are-worried-says-european-rocket-chief-at-prospect-of-launch-competition/

> The next generation of launch would be done “in a very different way,” he said, acknowledging that this would put pressure on ArianeGroup’s owners, Airbus and Safran. “If they have a very competitive launcher, then they are in the race. But there is no guarantee.”

>>15966599
They should be worried.

https://europeanspaceflight.com/the-exploration-company-begin-cnes-backed-rocket-engine-development/

> Founded in 2021, The Exploration Company has been developing a modular, reusable spacecraft called Nyx. The company is expected to propose a variant of this vehicle as part of the European Space Agency’s LEO Cargo Return Service initiative. With the announcement that the company will be developing a methane-powered high-thrust engine, it appears to be broadening its product offering.

>>15966599
>>15966607
How to leave this godforsaken hellhole (Europe)?

>>15966612
I guess you could just walk through the souther border in the USA at this point, legal immigration seems kind of difficult
that might change with the next admin though

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1744812135937396788

>>15966628
yeah but he smoked weed once so it doesn't count. as simple as that

>>15966612
Earn enough money. Then just go wherever you please

>>15966599
In all seriousness, going with the Ariane 6 PPH probably would have been a better idea at this point

>>15966521
real

results over rhetoric

https://twitter.com/Commercial_Crew/status/1744828629589070150
>STARLINER UPDATE: Teams from NASA and Boeing completed a two-parachute drop test for the modified parachute system of Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft at the U.S. Army’s Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona. Parachute deployment and a soft landing of the test article were visually confirmed. We are now awaiting preliminary data analysis and will release more details from the test as they become available in the coming days.
What do you guys think they'll take away from this?

>>15966686
my tax payer’s money

>>15966686
>4 years delayed for this

>>15966672
>failed payload
Vulcan sucks.

https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4721/1

>>15966672
>C3 significantly off

Muh high energy optimization.

>>15966709
Was it actually Vulcan's fault?

aren't there G sensors or shit which show what happened?

>>15966720
Is water wet?

>>15966720
No.

>>15966720
probably not, Tory has also said that it went well from their perspective
Astrobotic hasn't yet revelead (or maybe don't know) the reason for leak, but probably a valve that was stuck for a reason or another, its always a valve

the reason could still be shaking by Vulcan though but still not the the "fault" of ULA in the sense that if the shaking is within the expected margin but Astrobotic just decided to wing it or something and the system couldn't handle the shaking (expected or not)

>>15966735
https://twitter.com/astrobotic/status/1744835489838854215

so it was a valve lol I knew it

IT'S ALWAYS A VALVE

>>15966743

>>15966349
>In a submarine tho...

>>15966753
Great game if you get a decent crew to fuck around with.

>>15966741
Alexa play Vindicated by Dashboard Confessional

>>15966753
STOP shilling this gayass game in every god damn thread faggot schizo.

why is eric berger so mean to nasa about launch dates

>>15966349
>540rem
I suppose you can have tech operating in those conditions?

ULAnon here

Get bent SpaceX fags

I reviewed all the accels, values were well within ICD limits

>>15966735
>>15966741
>>15966743

>>15966774
>ULAnon here

Get a life man

>>15966774
and?

>>15966774
Brendan is that you?

>>15966776
>>15966778
Seething

>>15966345
Frankly it should have happened decades ago but regulatory fuckery got in the way.

>>15966362
Get Starship crew-rated and cancel the HLS variant and SLS.

>>15966735
>blown ox tank
literally Apollo 13 with robots

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1744821008366707191

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1744801160777638265

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1744801220739371087

lel

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1744801160777638265

https://twitter.com/Erdayastronaut/status/1744773765198647396

>>15966774
you mean they were below shaken payload syndrome threshold

>>15966790
"seething" is just "umad?" for zoomers

>>15966813
why was delta 4 heavy so expensive?
in the spacex 2017 all hands I think Musk might have said it was 800 mil per launch
what is the actual cost if that is the monopolistic max price (might not be related to actual cost much, just what they can get away with)

https://spacenews.com/china-launches-lobster-eye-einstein-probe-to-unveil-mysteries-of-x-ray-universe/

>>15966819
>why was delta 4 heavy so expensive?
"Boeing doesn't roll out of bed for less than $1bn"

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/01/citing-crew-safety-nasa-delays-upcoming-artemis-missions-by-about-a-year/

>>15966839
"The safest launch is no launch."

>>15966326
drain the radiation belts temporarily

>>15966774
>Collision with Centaur damaged a valve
Sad!

>>15966815
Yes, if the vibration values are less than what you tell the customer the vibration values might be, you have not shaken the payload.

Whether astrobotic adequately qualified the vehicle is a whole different question.

>>15966819
The more you launch a rocket the less each launch will cost because you've got more flights to spread the fixed costs of your factory, pad, etc, between. Delta IV never had a great flight rate to begin with due to the constellation collapse in the late 90s. After ULA was formed Delta IV was stuck with just the less frequent heavy missions because it actually had a heavy configuration while the Atlas V didn't. At the same time, Atlas V got all of the less demanding launches because it was a bit cheaper. That left Delta IV with a very expensive factory and launch pad with maybe one launch per year to cover the costs of.

It's also artificially inflated by having the government as its only customer. Military missions always have extra requirements that drive the price above the commercial standard.

>>15966847
see
>>15966790

>>15966326
Callisto is a far better alternative for many reasons.

>>15966852
I appreciate the copypaste even if it glosses over the ULA monopoly disincentivising lowering costs.

>>15966326
in this scenario synthetic bodies will out-compete biological ones

https://youtu.be/eneGYA11CWQ?si=_nS_iW_AVkYNYUMa
the nsf guy is getting extremely hard to look at

Polaris dawn and Dreamchasers maiden flight are in the same month

There are no ULA employees here

>>15966872
I think it's mostly the strange and unfortunate choice of lighting

Reminder, only China and India has lunar lander

>>15966876
Hello

>>15966877
He's a literal egg head and desperatwly needs to shave. flabby neck/chin, go to the gym

>>15966885
China is extremely fucking strong

>>15966839
Alright place your bets. Will GTA VI come out before or after Artemis II?

Asking here since ChatGPT wont give good answer:
It's known that many thought Apollo was a precurser to much bigger operations,
But were any apollo missions actually tasked with things related to lunar settlement?
Did any missions recon the terrain for that purpose?

>>15966885
This is like Mars in the 20th century, most of the shit doesn't work.

>>15966885
Let that sink in

>>15966326
>All these worlds are yours, except Europa; make no attempt to colonize here

>>15966511
>>15966508
I wonder how many trips they could reduce if they staged SuperHeavy say 10mi higher than where it currently does hot staging in addition to the 10% length increase expected on the V2 Starship design, which brings with it more fuel to get to orbit and keep more in the tank so that less flights to full tank are necessary.

https://twitter.com/SpaceflightNow/status/1744803042547904643
>Nelson says he's not concerned that China will land on the Moon before the U.S. He said they have an aggressive plan and it would be a PR coup, but he doesn't think it's a reality.
Perhaps the most important quote of the evening
Rest of that conference is meh

>>15966938
>dumb boomer thinks China bad
wow so insightful

https://democrats-science.house.gov/news/press-releases/01/09/2024/ranking-members-lofgren-and-sorensen-statement-on-artemis-mission-delay
Congressional hearing on Artemis delays next week

>>15966405
Seething troon kek

>>15966928
Who are you quoting?

>>15966938
what is so interesting about that? Heard it too but its so information free its pointless to talk about
of course he is going to say that, doesn't matter if its true or not

>>15966959
>>15966938
good thread you found though though I would say a more put together version of what was talked about is in >>15966839

>>15966944
chance someone is going to blame SpaceX?

>>15966958
How do you not get that fucking reference anon?

https://twitter.com/astrobotic/status/1744859691404927300

>>15966965
Artemis is a bad program, end of discussion.
But yes SpaceX will get blamed for not coming up with HLS on time.
>>15966944
No one is actually going until they have the technology base to support a regular cadence of launches to the moon and back
We're nowhere near ready yet and certainly China/Russia aren't either

>>15966968

>>15966971

>>15966966
I dont watch movies or read books other than textbooks you fat nigger

>>15966974
so the messages of children from all over the world are going to smash into Luna?

>>15966977
You uncultured swine, go play in vacuum.

Ahhh wishing decompression on a random for not getting a reference, never change /sfg/.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlKL_EpnSp8
READ A BOOK!

>>15966983
Lay off fiction, gaylord

>>15966995
Not before you kiss the bottom of a raptor exhaust plume.

>>15966979
No, they're going to enter into a multi-thousand year orbit around the sun.

SpaceX needs to launch Starship like 20 times in 2 years to make the demo possible. Unbelievable.

>>15967015
Remove the FAA and they can do that in 1.

>>15966974
Pittsburgh truly is the Russia of America
Leave it to Pittsburgh to fuck it up

>>15967005
Is it confirmed that Peregrine actually is in a heliocentric orbit? Or that it has moved significantly outside the initial trajectory Centaur set it on? Seemed like all they've been doing for the past couple days is burning RCS to keep it sun oriented

>>15967028
Sienna Miller was right

>>15967050
about isru?

>>15966938
>"russia will never invade ukraine"
american politicians right up until russia actually did it. then they're like "how did we miss it?". same will happen with "china will never beat us to the moon".

>>15967141
>during the Cold War NASA administrators were getting frequent updates about the Soviet space program from the CIA
I assume he knows more than he's letting on

>>15967112
It's just a dumb boomer reference. It's an ok city but kind of depressing.

>>15966384
I honestly hope so. That's what NASA and Congress deserve

>>15967141
The lunar mission plan they're following is reasonable, but their lander is still a model and they changed the size on their next gen crew capsule so that's undergoing a major if not near-complete rework. The engines for the LM-10 seem to be testing well, but progress looks like it's going at more of a Blue Origin speed than a SpaceX one. CALT hasn't shown off any test tanks, and no one's broken any ground on a launch complex, and that last item is going to take at least 24 months to finish off. They could beat Artemis to the moon, but that would be more on Artemis slow rolling their own program than China decisively progressing forward.

>>15966876
Here's the box they sent us prior to launch

>>15967182
How much money does shit like this cost? Or the 10lb blocks of plastic to contain a couple metal shavings as a souvenir? All this shit adds up, for the cost of this crap you could do actual rocket science.

>>15967192
Like $10? Maybe? And the acrylic things are usually made on someone's own time.

I waste more time taking a shit and posting on 4chan.

>>15967182
what's inside

>>15967194
For $10 I can eat for the day with leftovers to spare, wasteful pigdisgusting companies leaking cash like water through a sieve. Not even Elon understands the true meaning of pinching pennies.

>>15967196
Cheesy rocket-themed snacks & a soda. Coloring book & pencils for kids. They'll give us a challenge coin & mission patch at some point too, nothing really "special" though.

>>15967204
>challenge coin
Like in AA?

>>15967201
I bet the west is decadent and weak too?

>>15967207
Sorta? But the MIC tradition of doing it comes from the military.

>>15967201
$10 won't buy you lunch in a first world country. I love you Anon, but you've gotta do better than that.

>>15967204
coins are nice

>>15967213
>$10
yeah that's like a shawarma here, no drinks. or maybe if you get a small one you can fit a soda or smth

>>15967214
One of my coworkers has an NROL-39 coin. He worked on the mission. I am insanely jealous

>>15967213
it easily buys you two lunches in Japan

>>15967222
whoa that looks nice

>>15967226
If you consider instant ramen lunch then sure

>>15967213
>>15967218
eh, just had a set meal(sandwhich, regular fries and drink) in jack-in-the-box for 7 bux here in socal
though i suppose regular size is not really considered a meal here in the USofA

I spent twelve dollars and change on a chicken sandwich, fries, and a drink at wendys today

>>15967229
instant ramen isn't even $1
Big bowls of ebi ramen at local restaurants are $4

>>15967234
Assuming a $10 a day budget and assuming you can rollover leftovers into the next day (buy a loaf of bread on monday, you still have some of it on tuesday) you can absolutely feed yourself sufficiently. Decadent eaters will be a liability on Mars until such time as there is abundance again.

Unless the FAA fucks off I don't see spaceX allowed enough launches to complete fuel transfer testing this year.

>>15967207
>going on 1 day(s) since I shook a payload to death

Let's say hypothetically, if I went to Mars, what alcoholic beverages should I bring assuming I never return?

>>15967234
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Nissin-Foods-Top-Ramen-Chicken/10320931

30 cents a piece. Thats just walmart. If you goto a local food store, it will be 10-20 cents and bulk discounts too

>>15967242
Biden's NASA wants SpaceX to be regulated so it could slow down SpaceX.

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1735030425490198913

>>15967241
well going that way 10$ can get me like 30 eggs and maybe some beans or rice

>>15967242
The FAA is hardly delaying SpaceX and if SpaceX stops having mishaps during launches they'll get their licenses much faster, too. If the next Starship launch happens in February without a bigger issue than the last one I expect all five launches to happen this year.

>>15967230
>>15967229
>>15967233
>>15967234
>>15967241
>>15967251
>>15967256
>/sfg/
>spacefood general

>>15967258
Sure they might get a single prop transfer test done this year, but they would be blocked from testing a full 10 tanker mission.

>>15967262
I love the freeze dried ice cream they sell at museum gift shops

>>15967250
have greenhouse

>>15967249
One day at a time

how scrambled are the astronauts going to get that ride on top of SLS?

>>15967258
>The FAA is hardly delaying SpaceX
Fuck you I remember the last 4 years

>>15967258
The FAA can GO FUCK YOURSELF

>>15967258
They delayed the initial environmental review by 2 years lmao. Then few more months after IFT-1, then few more months now.

Its a fucking joke.

If the Republic of Texas seceded do you think President Abbot would let SpaceX do whatever they want on the beach?

>>15967280
No because they would be immediatly invaded and overthrown by the cartel.

>>15967258
>mishaps

>>15967273
>>15967276
Not the FAA's fault SpaceX started the EA so late, they should've done it way earlier (ideally just a new EIS for 2016 ITS back when still nobody cared and all this wouldn't be an issue because they'd be cleared for a much larger rocket). Also not the FAA's fault SpaceX take so long with their mishap investigations, if they're done earlier they can get their license earlier.

>>15967285
referring to the first two full stack Starship flights and the FAA calling it a mishap investigation

>>15967290
Fuck you

>>15967290
Also I hope they are in preliminary discussions for extending the number of launches because that WR/probably EA is gonna be a bitch to get with how the last one went and things have been going. Hope they've been enabling lots of check ups on animals and stuff because the more data they have that the animals don't fucking care the easier it'll be to argue they won't care with 10, 15, 25 launches either. I'd guess you'd want to have one or two more smooth launches for data and then go for it? Or maybe that's when they'll finally go for KSC (start on LC-49 already cowards) because honestly I'm not sure if they can get away with much more at Boca Chica before getting EIS'd.

>>15967297
Cogent argument

Imagine a world where mankind uses expendable vehicles to go to and from destinations.

>>15967317
I don't understand this reusable bicycle meme
do you recover the tires and attach them to a new frame?

>>15967284
>Implying that the cartel won't just use starship to land 100tons of drugs wherever they want to sell it

Is this what the average Firefly employee looks like?

>>15967332
they don't have a winch, he's the chain puller

Should next OP be a Vast shill thread or a Stoke shill thread?

>>15967347
Stoke is cooler

>>15967347
SLS a shit - thread
but it won't be necessary to make one for like half a day

>>15967332
This is the guy inside the Spinlaunch accelerator actually throwing the rockets

>>15966362
Space X sends a crew to the moon to test HLS

>>15967352
Strongly considering this

>>15967347
Should be a Vulcan bad vibes thread

>>15967347
Gravitics! :3

is the romanian guy still grifting?

>>15967367
I already made the Total Peregrine Death edition youre kicking a dead horse at this point
>>15967383
Yes and the ARCA twitter account got hacked KEEEEEEEK

>>15967368
Definetly not, and yes you can thank that trans emoticon there. VASTGODS RULE LEO GTFO

>>15966326
this needs to wait until there's more off earth infrastructure
until then this is Robert DeNiro territory

>>15967388
Vast! (｀・ω・´)

>>15967396
>resorting to falseflagging
kek

>>15966362
A friendly executive branch unhobbling SpaceX, SpaceX doing the whole mission without NASA, and equal parts talent, good luck and hard work.

>>15966384
I'll post in this thread from the Chinese moon base

>>15967402
And relieving the FAA of the duty of regulating spaceflight and leaving it to a new dedicated branch that is actually FRIENDLY to ambition.

>>15967290
FAA determination of whether or not to do EIS took 2 years. Thats the fucking stupid part. They should have sped up the process because its a fucking national security program. Instead they decided to play politics with castration ideology

>>15967405
agreed

>>15967405
let SpaceX self-regulate, I'm sure they would do it more effectively and faster
probably develop some system that could be adopted widely
total bureucracy death

>>15967411
US government would never let go of any fraction of power they have, ESPECIALLY to a company that is literally saying it wants to colonize Mars, not for the US but for themselves. Obviously I would prefer SpaceX to self regulat but lets not fool ourselves into believing the government arent a bunch of power bungry bastards.

>>15967405
>and leaving it to a new dedicated branch
Anyone who thinks you can fix old bureaucracy by giving its responsibility to new bureaucracy doesn't really understand the problem

>>15967418
See >>15967417

>>15967405
>REGULATE
Remove the regulation as commercial space venture is extremely nascent and has no room for 2-3 years of regulatory delays for a new project. Its just insane.

>>15967425
Again, you fucking morons, read >>15967417. The US government would never give up their power over AAAAANNNYTHING willingly, MOST DEFINETLY INCLUDING any sort of homeland regulation, especially for a company they directly work with via USSF where they want quality control and for other companies, even if their track record is good theyre a bunch of stingy bastards who will always keep an eye on everything you do.

>>15967432
laws can be changed and it seems like Musk is interested in affecting policy now
maybe the 2 year EA was part of the reason to buy Twitter

>>15967432
Time to remove the US gov and replace it with something less restrictive.

shit in my moith

>>15967439
What is a moith and why do you own one.

>Let SpaceX self-regulate!
lmao
The only thing the FAA requires is to not kill anyone and to unfuck your shit when you fucked it. They have been extremely accommodating to SpaceX and only resulted in minimal delays that weren't SpaceX's own fault.

>>15967406
Yes, that's how long a PEA usually takes. Again, not the FAA's fault SpaceX started the process so late, they knew it'd take this long so they should've started earlier, like when they started bending metal there and shit would've been done way early and with less enviro screeching because nobody cared yet. The military goes through these processes as well, there's no accelerating and Starship is years from being relevant for national security anyways. Also SpaceX wasn't even able to launch until shortly before the PEA conclusion anyways.

The FAA must be conpletely dismantled and their employees rounded up and executed (lawfully).
Journalists must be rounded up and executed (lawfully).
These are just suggested enforcements of the exectutive that must occur to ensure a prosperous space future. This is not investment advice

NASA's new "inclusive" space suit. Meaning -- it's Trans comparable or something.

>>15967450
Theyve been very accomodating with the resources they have, their stretched too thin across aerospace and spaceflight, the branch needs to be subdivided so the spaceflight sector can have more resources to have the regulatory proceedings dealt with quickly. I know theyve been accomodating but its still hostile to ambition with how slow and little resources they get from congress.

>>15967455
Built in dilator

>>15967463
Built in dick chopper

>>15967452
Gov bootlickers also needs to be sent to gulag and be re-educated on the merits of bootlicking

>>15967465
Built in noose

>>15967455
Looks like the suit Collins is working on. Wonder if NASA will alternate between it and the Axiom suit for Artemis missions.

>>15967475
haha it looks a little like the amogus guys

Good Morning User:NASA. Would you like me to design a valve for you? (Y/N)

>>15966515
>They don't wanna deal with an Astronauts Union.
Jokes aside that's something commercial space flight providers may have to reckon with eventually

>>15967481
If what they are selling is livings on Mars they won't worry about that for a long while.

>>15967452
Or Elon could get his head out of his ass, have his companies take one step back from the edge of legality and stop blaming regulations for delays they are responsible for themselves.

>>15967461
They already have the AST division for all things commercial space, congress could easily just give them more resources which they have surely been requesting. That's not exactly the FAA's fault either, they have no control over how much they get. That recent congressional panel (that they weren't invited to for whatever reason) pretty much had that purpose, to try and get congress to take note and give AST more funding. Although looking at >Boeing I'd say the rest of the agency could probably use more funding too lel
Also I don't think a couple of weeks of review after a mishap can be considered hostile to ambition, once the kinks are worked out I expect licenses to come as smoothly as for F9. SpaceX has to do those investigations anyways to figure out what went wrong and having someone looking over their shoulder may motivate them to get it fixed properly more quickly.

>>15967461
They usually don't need to do that much, and lean heavily on SLD30 and 45 to any of the actual heavy lifting when it comes to design certification. When SpaceX all of the sudden starts launching rockets with faulty flight termination systems from a pad that SLD30/45 don't care about, the FAA has to take up all that slack.

>>15966574
Yes. Congress needs to wake the fuck up and actually demand something of NASA with a deadline that isn't perpetually 2+ election cycles away

>>15967486
having fish and wildlife do some absolute bullshit month long review is hostile to ambition
what kind of fucking bullshit was that? absolutely ridiculous

>>15967493
That's part of the NEPA process that the FAA has no influence over and also one of those things SpaceX could've had done earlier by assessing it properly in the PEA (or alternatively avoided completely by not discharging water in the wetlands but that's not really an option at that location). SpaceX was just lazy/fucked around and found out by trying to get away without a flame deflector, that was all entirely of their own making.

>>15967504
SpaceX removed it because it would have delayed the project by 5-10 years.

>>15967508
Clearly it delayed the project by at most a month and could've not delayed it at all if they'd assessed it in the PEA instead of putting "we'll have water deluge but we're not gonna assess it lol" in there.

>>15967511
Not everything needs to be assessed
Reject ridiculous rules, roll back federal overreach
The EPA rules about wetlands are horseshit

>>15967511
>hehe just delay 2000 employees for a month, we are government employees who get paid no matter what :)

Then you wonder why "old space" existed

>>15967218
Where the fuck do you guys live? I bought an 8 pack of chicken thighs and like 1.5lbs of broccoli florets for ~$11 on Sunday. Meal prepped for a whole week of lunches plus sunday dinner with the addition of some rice out of the $1/lb bag I bought months ago

>DOOD JUST MEAL PREP DOOD
>JUST BUY IN BULK AND PREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP THE MEALS
>EAT CHICKEN AND RICE EVERY DAY EVERY MEAL

>>15967527
Anyone who says this should be shot.

>>15967527
You can eat pasta and beef too, potatoes

>>15967529
BE SURE TO WASH YOUR RICE AND BOIL YOUR CHICKEN
ALSO ONIONS PROTEIN SHAKE FOR BREAKFAST

>>15967521
Maybe you can't read but it wouldn't have been a month delay if SpaceX had just done it earlier, but since they were too lazy they'd to do it then. This could easily be avoided by not being a fucking retard and thinking you can get away without it.

>>15967527
>>15967529
>I CANT COOOOK
Your Uber Eats driver with the cold Wendy's will be here in 30-50 minutes. That'll $30 plus tip

>>15967546
I can cook my own food you stupid nigger I just dont like eating it cold out of the fucking fridge and microwaved like I'm some poor fucking hobo at a cafeteria. I WILL COOK MY OWN FOOD AND EAT IT RIGHT AFTER YOU FUCKING BASTARDS THERES NO NEED TO MEAL PREP STUPID SHIT AHEAD OF TIME I WILL ENJOY MY FUCKING FOOD AND YOU WILL NOT SAY A THING ABOUT IT FUCK YOU FUCK YOUR EATING PROGRAMS FUCK YOUR SCAM APPS FUCK YOUR DISGUSTING MEALS AND MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL FUCK YA MUDDAH

>>15967527
>>15967549
retarded

>>15967534
>>15967549
I literally made braised beef and mashed potatoes for dinner lol I just meal prep for my lunches for the work week

>>15967553
>slop'o shit

>>15967553
That looks fucking disgusting. Go eat your rotten mush and piss off, you wont dictate shit about how I cook my food

>>15967553
Anyways, well probably be eating onions paste for the first few decades on Mars anyways

/sfg/ - shitty food general

>>15967553
this looks like vomit anon

/sfg/ - Stupid Fuck General

dood check out my instant mash potatos and canned beef

>>15967553
MREs look better than this

>>15966899
>It's known that many thought
No fucking wonder ChatGPT doesn't want to answer you. It's been taught not to engage other bots.

>>15967560
>>15967563
Sorry guys next time I'll sprinkle chives or some other decorative green shit on it to make it appeal more to the /sfg/ food critics. I'll have you know it tasted fucking great and I made it from scratch for less than $10.
Moving forward, has there been any serious research done on space faring aquaculture? Love me a good fish fry

>>15967570
>costed him $10
You do know a pack of instant mash potatoes is $2 and that beef and slop is probably $4 right? And thats $6 for 4 meals? You fucking retard? Preaching to us about saving money TAKE A LOOK IN THE FUCKING MIRROR

/sfg/ - Super Fun General

>>15967579
You brought this on yourself by acting like a high and mighty ass hole dick weed. You think people respond well to you attention whoring in a place where youre supposed to be anonymous??

>>15967572
I must have cut deep with that Uber Eats jab. There were 4 blade steaks in the pack and I have a bunch of left over mashed potatoes because I bought 3 huge ones - who the fuck eats instant mashed potatoes who isn't in school/prison/military? I will grant that instant taters are the best option for space flight and I'll admit the red wine I braised the beef in was left over from a previous shopping trip and I already had onions and garlic on hand

What the fuck? Wasn't the original comment about buying lunch? When did this thread become about retards boiling potatoes to minmax their $/kg of a meal

>>15967249
>Metal from Vulcan booster
I don't get it. It obviously wasn't from a flown rocket. Is it from a test article? That doesn't really feel very special. That's like getting a shaving off one of the thousands of rings lying on the side of the road at Starbase.

>>15967588
Diligence and discipline are what it takes to set up a Mars colony, not Uber Eats fast food

/sfg/ - Slapfight General

>>15967594
Cut chips (generally the first cut) are traditionally kept and given as gifts in trinkets like these

>>15967594
Metal shavings from milling out isowaffles.

>>15967481
Reminder that the only reason why the Shuttle couldn't be automatically controlled (like Buran) was because the Astronaut Corps (read: Astronaut Union) were worried they were gonna be automated and lose their jobs.

Why does /sfg/ not want to colonize Venus?

>>15967604
Colonizing Venus Pros:
>High atmospheric pressure
>Similar gravity to Earth
Colonizing Venus Cons:
>Lethal atmosphere
>Lethal surface temperatures
>Unfavorable atmospheric composition
>Deep gravity well makes orbital access on par with Earth for difficulty
>Planet's resources, such as they are, are inaccessible with all foreseeable technologies in this or the next century

>>15967604
Venus is archetypically female while Mars is archetypically male. We're all faggots here who like giant phallic objects (rockets) so we also want to colonize the male planet. Same reason why /sfg/ doesn't like Lunar colonization, because the Luna is a woman.

>>15967623
>we
ever heard of spin launch?

>>15967604
The only kinds of Venus colonies you can build without full terraforming (orbital habs) are only economically viable if Venus's location as a stopover "around" the sun is worthwhile to get a better launch window for going other places further out, like Mars, Jupiter, or the asteroids, so you need to colonize those places first. You'd think Mars would be the stopover point but transfer mechanics penalize the fuck out of travel between two bodies with very similar orbital speeds.

>>15967625
meme concept that isn't scalable even if it were to work

>>15967633
You need to kill yourself immediatly

Post your ridicule face for >Shartemis

>>15967637

>>15967637
What u say bich

>>15967634
Face it, rockets will always be the superior option to get to space. Long and girthy, they can thrust hard enough to blast the seed of human civilization all over other planetary bodies. Spin launch could only put small packages into low orbit at best. Interplanetary societies will gawk at its small payload size.

Astrobotic bros, Peregrine isn't showing up on the DSN website.
I've been looking throughout today and this is the first time I haven't seen it communicating.
Has it truely died?
https://eyes.nasa.gov/dsn/dsn.html

>>15967642
Yea they announced it. Shits finished

>>15967646
It was a success

>>15967642
DSN is gonna get raped when dozens of CLPS landers and cubesats all try to get network time.

>>15967604
We do, but it will take so long for SpaceX to develop a blimp that can stay floating forever with little required maintenance against acid rain so we'll all be old as fuck by the time anything meaningful happens. Meanwhile literally the only thing preventing us from living on Mars is getting there.

Personally, I would like to attempt to colonize the Venus underground, but realistically I would now be discussing 2100 goals instead of 2050 goals and there is no way anyone here including me will stay around that long (Aubrey de Grey got MeToo'ed so it's over)

What does /sfg/ think the next target after Mars should be? Imo Titan is the most appealing

These last two threads managed to stay exactly in the camps of equal and opposite retardation. Terrible.

>>15967653
>putting SLS and the Shittle moneyburning/murdering machine in this compilation
Literally why? It makes the collage look insincere.

>>15967654
>collage
i think you know why its there anon

>>15967654
It's a useful scale comparison and people know about them, so I think that's part of it.

>>15967650
nah bro they are all programmed to die within a month anyway

Was at the Tropical Smoothie Cafe in South Padre Island earlier. I was browsing /sfg/ while enjoying being near SpaceX during my sabbatical. After a long semester of harassing female college students, and telling my stories of working in the field as a data analyst for JPL. Looking forward, us members of the inteligencia will enjoy the successful starship test next month.

>>15966321
What would be the point in going there? There's no other life in the solar system.

>>15967684
you answered your question with your follow up

>>15967687
No I didn't?

>>15967689
There's no other life in the solar system, that is the point in going

What would the edge of the universe look like? Genuine question.

>>15967690
You retarded?

>>15967692
No he isn't, you on the other habd

>>15967691
The edge of the observable universe is exactly the same as here with different galaxies, just more universe.

>>15967691
What does the edge of the earth look like? There is no edge of the universe.

>>15967694
Not the observable universe, dummy, I mean the whole entire thing. If it's not infinite, and it is flat, then there's necessarily a border somewhere out there where spacetime simply ends. What would that look like? How would particles behave when they hit the rim? I cannot imagine it.

>>15967696
>What does the edge of the earth look like? There is no edge of the universe.
This analogy only makes sense if we're assuming the universe has positive curvature.

>>15967693
Yeah ok, spending trillions of dollars to go to a dead moon with no life. That totally has a point.

>>15967699
Conquer it, make it ours. Breed there.

>>15967704
I don't think anyone would want to breed on a frozen ice ball.

>>15967709
Inuit exist.

>>15967699
Money isn't real when it comes to this level of technology. It is only real to the workers who make the equipment. They are so detached from what is going on they may as well be seals paid to clap and bounce beach balls on their whiskered noses.

>>15967651
>What does /sfg/ think the next target after Mars should be? Imo Titan is the most appealing
To visit, possibly Ceres or another large main belt asteroid. To stay, Callisto

>>15967717
there is scripture on this

>>15967649
meme that aged like fine piss

>>15966333
Elon should've married her. He would have never gone mad

>>15967697
>then there's necessarily a border somewhere out there where spacetime simply ends
Not really actually. If the universe is not infinite then the most likely geometry is finite unbound, finite volume with no edges. If you kept going in one direction you would loop back to where you started, this is a closed universe. A lot like the surface of the Earth, which is finite but has no edge.
That said given current data it appears that even if the universe were slightly closed like this you would never be able to to travel far enough to loop back. Most likely it's infinite though.

NEW GLENN IS ON THE MOVE

>>15967882
Lots of shots from this morning

>>15967886
This is flight hardware

Tory keeps saying there are things his rockets can do but not Falcon Heavy.
Is there any truth to this?
Why did X-37B launch on FH then?

>>15967895
>Is there any truth to this?
If you use an outrageously light weight payload into a weird orbit, probably. ULA likes to advertise "energy" in their launch vehicles because it sounds important but doesn't actually mean anything. People should just pay attention to payload mass, delta-V calculations, and burn profiles.

>>15967888

I'm still pissed off at the leak...

>>15967901
Milled orthogrid for the fin boxes and interstage is an interesting choice.