/sci/ - Science & Math

The FAA investigation is concluded, but is there any other major paperwork that needs to be done?

>>16046534
The mishap investigation is not the launch license, but the pacing item for this launch is vehicle readiness

>>16046535
And what's the status on the vehicle readiness?

>>16046536
2 more weeks

>>16046536
two wet dress rehearsals were attempted but there was a problem both times, the ship and booster were both destacked and moved to the factory
now the ship has apparently undergone a spin prime and I think both the ship and booster have been static fired before? not sure anymore lol
the problem with the WDR could have been any of the launch pad, booster or ship, so it is unclear what has to be done but I would imagine they want to do a wet dress rehearsal before launch
modify/fix one or all three of those mentioned systems
the launch site has had extensive upgrades after IFT-2 so that might have been the problem but who knows, they added some new baffles (or perhaps filters) to the booster so that might have been the problem too

>>16046536
Check back after we observe a full-duration full-stack static fire.

You always stage before im ready

>>16046060
>>16046556
No water on Mars though, nor no worms

>>16046561
worms generate spontaneously

>>16046561
mars has plenty of water

>>16046561
you're wrong on the first count and the second issue is easily fixable

LMAO
NASA
CRASHED

>>16046071
the risk they pose on the lunar surface makes no fucking sense. they may be a decent option for Mars tho, where a rip in your suit doesn't spell instant doom.

>>16045839
I was reflecting on this the other day and I realised I forgot the fourth option, which is no LES. The argument is basically that helicopters have black zones and no ejection seats (except that one Russian one) but we put up with them because they're useful and mishaps aren't that common. I don't think Starship will get near that degree of confidence, though, even if everything goes right and there are airline-style launches every few hours and no accidents once it enters production: rockets are bigger, more complicated, and fail in worse ways than helicopters, and fly less often. Also I can't see Nasa/the FAA approving it (despite these being the same bureaucracies that designed and greenlit the Shuttle). SpaceX might not even want to go with this option, even if it's actually sensible, due to the PR/regulatory hazard if something does go wrong.

Also, if we assume that the Starships that carry humans get expended up in space (and hence don't need to survive re-entry, and the biggest stress on them is at max Q which is mostly longitudinally compressive), the idea of not having a header tank and having the whole upper part of Starship separate and be the survivability unit starts to make a little bit of sense (to me, at least). Question there is if SpaceX will want to have this much variation in design and if the expendability is tolerable operationally.

>>16046597
>Mars
>where a rip in your suit doesn't spell instant doom.
Uh yeah it does

>>16046597
0Pa and 1000Pa is physiologically the same

>>16046609
NTA but I don't buy the official value for Mars pressure.

>>16046611

>>16046617
technically all you have to do is get a pile of dirt on you to achieve 1 atm

>>16046606
yeah somehow I was under the impression that it's not THAT far from Earth's. but I guess I was thinking about temperature or something.

>>16046619
that does not seem very practical

>>16046626
we have to accept the challenge

>>16046570
you're not trying to irrigate an earth sized farm. And you can re use the water afterwards!!!!! I don't know if you know this but the ISS has one of these so called 'water reclaimers.' Pretty interesting stuff

>>16046544
New faster fill for reduced propellant temps might be the problem as well

>>16046524
Looks cool.
Too bad it doesn't work.

>>16046646
anon you need to be excavating gigagrams of water ice in order to feed the Starship machine anyway, you can spare some water for farming and washing soil (for when you need some iron oxide and silicates or whatever, what's even in martian dirt)

What's some fiction popular amongst /sfg/ posters? Almost done with Rendezvous with Rama and curious if the sequels are worth reading.

>>16046699
revelation space series and hyperion cantos series are pretty good
the previous scifi I read was dark forest #2 but I think its somewhat overrated, though good I guess

https://twitter.com/ISROSpaceflight/status/1762375292298125448

>>16046704

>>16046704
When are they supposed to fly?

>>16046699
Foundation?

>>16046699
go read Larry Niven's Protector - there's a battle fought with Bussard ramjets among the solar neighborhood

>>16046705
>>16046704
Are they launching 4 people in the first mission? Based

>>16046704
>>16046705
5, 4, 3, 2, 1 REDEEM

what is the most kino rocket?

>>16046144
Apart from the supply side limitations of ramping up cadence, there are also demand side limitations. Something has to happen to radically increase demand to make high cadence worthwhile. Amazon decides they want Kuiper to be the same size as Starlink, the USSF decides they want their own Starlink-size constellation and for it to be launched by more than one launch provider, etc

>>16046707
The more pressing schedule is that Indian elections are in April
>>16046705

>>16046704
>>16046705
Inshallah rocket will success

>>16046603
>The argument is basically that helicopters have black zones and no ejection seats (except that one Russian one) but we put up with them because they're useful and mishaps aren't that common.
Starship is LITERALLY the Space Shuttle

What "innovation" did SpaceX employ that caused the failure of IFT-2?

>>16046741
Starship

>>16046773
that guy's a fucking faggot retard, but he's talking about that supposed design change where the oxygen autogenous pressurization system was swapped from using boiled oxygen to using tap-off gasses from the oxygen preburners, resulting in some H2O and CO2 ice chunks forming in the tank. Top surface of LOx gets chunky, no issue during boost, but the flip stirred the chunks down into the liquid, and one of the engines got its uptake pipe clogged.

>>16046741
Proton

>>16046391
In the case of Blorigin, I think it is because they hubristically decided to develop a rocket with very advanced engines as their first orbital rocket, which led to massive delays

In the case of ULA, I think it is because they have been laser focused on NSSL Lane 2 type contracts, for which reusability wasn't really seen as necessary and for which meeting the full range of reference orbits with a single reusable rocket is not so easy, unless you make a tricore variant like FH. Also they were limited in their engine choice because they didn't develop in-house.

In the case of other US launch companies, I think it is because they couldn't raise enough money to develop an F9 clone until investors had seen the F9 prove it was economically viable (because people still remembered how Shuttle reusability failed). Nor did these companies have a NASA contract that could fill the money gap, Nor can they effectively fund R&D with revenue from a product of intermediate quality like SpaceX did, because they don't have first mover advantage like SpaceX did (SpaceX only had to compete with oldspace, newcomers have to compete with SpaceX)

In the case of China, I think it is because in 2014 they decided to open up the launch industry to commercial companies, leading to a deluge of startups that still haven't consolidated, and CASC profusely bleeding skilled labor. So they now have 15+ F9 cloning projects and 25+ liquid engine projects running in parallel, diluting R&D resources and making everything run slower

In the case of Europe, Japan, Russia, India, etc, I think it is because they don't (yet) have enough guaranteed domestic payloads to justify creating a new rocket which is radically different and which would require a total overhaul of the supply chains and new launch pads. Nor do they think they can ever catch up to and be competitive on the open market with the industry leaders in the US so it would mostly just be a waste of money to try

>>16046785
"Spaceguy5" or the other one?

The failed IM-1 moon crasher dies today, but before is does:

> IM-1 has maybe 5 floppy disks of data left available to pull.

>>16046785
That's a garbage design change for reusability if true. Going to have to clean out the tanks every single time it's used. I hope they haven't done that just because "muh best part"

>>16046803
Also, the initial focus of most Chinese launch start-ups has been to get a minimum viable product out the door ASAP, to prove themselves to investors so they can raise more money before they go bankrupt. Developing an F9 clone is usually step two or three on their roadmap.

CASC has been largely focused on trying to complete the CZ-5 to 8 line of rockets. They're only going to be completing that process this year, with first launches of CZ-6C and CZ-8G

>>16046803
Someone that isn't talked about: no one has engines suitable for reusable rockets at least not from what i've seen
The secret to SpaceX's VTVL is the Merlins having a variable thrust ratio of 40% and only having a thrust of 36-85t, which combined with the mass of the F9 stage 22-25t, can easily achieve a vertical landing.
Other companies are unable to do this because they don't have any engines available with the appropriate thrust.
Most engines have a higher thrust with a 50% throttle of >50t.
CASC's inventory of engines (esp in the next 5 years) is going to be insane and it's going to pass them to 'private' companies.

>>16046712
Bussard ramjets don't work, sadly

>>16046852
I know, its a shame but magnetic braking looks likely to work and that saves a shitload of reaction mass

>>16046846
Yes, they all have to develop a reusable rocket basically from scratch. But it shouldn't take more than 9 years to do develop a simple F9 clone with suitable kerolox gas generator engines if the project is serious and well-funded. That's almost as long as it took SpaceX, and they were distracted by many intermediary steps and were not well-funded during most of that time. So there has to be more than just that to it

>>16046098
Test flight failures don't really matter. They're just another development expense, just like spending more time on ground tests or computer simulations would be. What matters is how much time and money the development process requires, and what product you eventually have at the end of it.

I think that for SpaceX, testing in flight is very economical because (a) they can test recovery while delivering payloads and having customers pay for the mission, and (b) for Starship, large engine production capacity ended up being ready long before the rocket had finished development, so they might as well waste engines in destructive testing.

>>16046846
Yes, they all have to develop a reusable rocket basically from scratch. But it shouldn't take 9 years to do develop a simple F9 clone with suitable kerolox gas generator engines if the project is serious and well-funded. That's almost as long as it took SpaceX, and they were distracted by many intermediary steps and were not well-funded during most of that time. So there has to be more than just that to it

>>16046705
>>16046704
>no women
>no muslims
>no dark skins
what did india mean by this?

>>16046773
He’s lying he’s lying he’s lying he’s lying he’s lying he’s lying he’s lying he is lyiiiiiiing, like the little smelly grunt he is!

Let's be very honest again, we don't have a commercially available heavy lift vehicle. Falcon 9 Heavy may someday come about. It's on the drawing board right now. SLS is real. You've seen it down at Michoud. We're building the core stage. We have all the engines done, ready to be put on the test stand at Stennis... I don't see any hardware for a Falcon 9 Heavy, except that he's going to take three Falcon 9s and put them together and that becomes the Heavy. It's not that easy in rocketry.

>>16046909
>Falcon 9 Heavy
what did bolden mean by this

>>16046741
Nuclear ICBMs
Huge fireworks show

>>16046892
Dude we are, generously, at a rate of one starship test a year. This is pure garbage for hardware rich development.

>>16046914
two weeks

>>16046914
Everything is relative. Compare with ULA or BO

>>16046914
It’s going as fast as possible but yeah it’s kind of pathetic. I think once it gets to orbit things will move a lot quicker though. And I’m willing to bet that ~5-10 years from now we will all look back on this dev period and say “yeah that was pretty damn quick overall, wow”

>>16046704
Where in the capsule is the shitting street installed?

>>16046914
Starship will be an extremely efficient PLEO vehicle
-Tory Bruno

>>16046773
both of these two are the most whiny insufferable cunts on spitter and I'm glad to have them blocked

>>16046741
Ever? Saturn V or Space Shuttle.
Now? Starship.

>>16046901
Nobody else has an iteration payload like Starlink. Nobody else is GOING to have one until there are propellant depots and reusable tugs on orbit so companies can send up tanker ships while they practice landing.

>>16046773
If you don't have something to say, don't bother tweeting.
>"Yeah bro I could say something right now but I can't!"
Okay, then shut up.

>>16046914
are you retarded? Its already way quicker than one per year
it took 7 months between IFT-1 (May 18) and IFT-2 (November 20)
if IFT-3 launches in March its going to be 4 months between launches
if it stays at that cadence (it won't), that would be 3 a year already

lmao

>>16046993
explain to me why I shouldn't buy a bunch of IM stock now and hold onto it until they make their next landing attempt

>>16047001
buy high sell low

>>16047001
Because you haven't done any due diligence and are just gambling.

>>16047003
what's your point?

>>16047001
i think its still dropping plus they have a very uncertain future. its a big gamble right now.

>>16047002
That doesn't make sense

>>16047012
“scientific advancement” (no units, just trust me bro)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zi7P8c15ao
>Starship Flight 2 Mishap Investigation Concluded

>>16047017
because this NIGGER forgot the most important part of his post I'll include it here in the reply: this is the NSF talking heads grift where they try to cash in on the news that the FAA has closed the Starship OFT-2 mishap investigation

>>16047021
isn't that pretty clear from the heading and picture?

>>16047029
no, I had to click through to figure out which channel it was

Bros so the robot welded up one half of the part and once it got to the other half I noticed it got warped completely out of shape. Will tacks prevent this?

>>16047030
lol are you retarded
open the embed and you see the logo

>>16047032
Your telling me this chandelier thrashcan is some super expensive physics experiment? LOL you globeheads are truly deluded

>>16047034
opening an embed is clicking through, I took the plunge so you niggers don't need to

>>16047037
do you want a medal?

>>16047037
thank you for your cervix

>>16047032
no
do the welds in spurts like you're tightening the bolts on a flange by jumping around, a few inches at a time
unfortunately this means you really need to nail down your starts and stops
>>16047038
yes
>>16047040
god bless america

>>16047042
the welder at my job did tell me tack would help though. But yes I will be modifying trajectory so it makes a weld on one side, and then one on the complete opposite side to cancel it out. Not sure about doing welds in spurts though. not easy to program with the vision system the robot has.

>>16047047
yeah that's what I meant
making sure you tack it in place first is important so it can't move before you start doing the star pattern

>>16046707
They will first send a humanoid robot this year, and in 2025, the manned crew will be sent.

>>16047056
lewd

GOES-U delayed a month (now targeting NET May, instead of April)
LOX leak detected in FH core booster

>>16047024
https://twitter.com/Int_Machines/status/1762490074048958522

>>16047061
https://twitter.com/Int_Machines/status/1762490076741644689

4 pictures, I guess its moving laterally? you can maybe see it when you click through them

>>16047062
>>16047061
so if I were to land on the moon could I just take that lander or any of them? it's not like anyone has real claim over land on the moon so I don't see how they could justify owning junk left around

>>16047065
the moon is full of free hardware

>>16047065
It’s a gray area, no pun intended; but essentially yes.
Just don’t go near the apollo landing sites. At least not Apollo 11s. Pls. There’s no law… it’s just an unspoken rule

>>16047065
>>16047071
its happening

the elites don't want you to know this but the landers on the moon are free you can take them home I have 23 moon landers

>>16047079
free soviet scrap metal on Venus!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAuJ1WhnGJA
>Dream Chaser Spaceplane Environmental Test Campaign at NASA Armstrong Test Facility

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSMJZmLMwrY
>The Controversial Quantum Drive was put to Test. It Didn't go as Planned.

>>16047091
Good fucking grief, this thing is still going to be in “testing” by 2040

>>16047091
dreamchaser getting vibration qualified for vulcan? is it even possible for a spacecraft to survive the vibrations of vulcan?

>>16046704
https://twitter.com/tobyliiiiiiiiii/status/1762377233044562177

>>16047092

>>16047098
Based Memeculloch not wanting to be bothered by a shrew as he rebuilds physics from the ground up

>>16047092
QI schizo's should consider taking their meds before they anhero from constant failure

>>16047104
the grift will continue

>>16047104
Einshteinfags should consider the same before pumping out viewbait “deboonks” of McCulloch’s peer-reviewed theory

>>16046832
It's a pretty clever change and cleaning whatever water/carbon dioxide that remains in the tank is trivial.

SpaceX has already resolved the novel failure mode.

Spaceguy5 hates SpaceX and reuse in general and Elon in particular so he isn't about to give them credit.

>>16047113
the CO2 will just piss off if you do a nitrogen purge
the water? also will fuck off if you do a dry nitrogen purge

>>16046804
space faggot 5, yes

>>16046832
"cleaning out the tanks" would be accomplished by a warm nitrogen purge. Not exactly tarring up the insides with oxygen rich preburner products.

>>16047037
Thanks, fuck that other guy

>>16047124
that is antithetical to rapid reuse. how can you expect to fly the same booster every 37 seconds if you have to spray down the inside between flights?

>>16047121
space faggot 69

>>16046852
>>16046865
Sure they do, they just don't work if you're using the scooped matter as fusion fuel. You need antimatter at a minimum, ideally in an antimatter catalyzed mass energy conversion reactor (uses annihilation of antimatter with an equal mass of matter to generate assloads of energy, which your machine uses some >50% fraction of to re-generate the starting mass of antimatter, effectively burning matter alone. Even a non-breakeven reactor like this would greatly extend the utility of your antimatter supply).
A micro black hole would also allow for bussard ram jets, but has its own challenges. For one, building the micro black hole lol.

>>16047098
Based

>>16046914
Starship launched twice last year and is launching again in several weeks (perhaps two)

>>16046968
SpaceX didn't have Starlink when they figured out Falcon 9 reuse. Modern companies have the advantage of multiple competing megaconstellations that all want more & cheaper launch availability, AND there are some that will pay for anything Not SpaceX.
It's never been so easy to break into the launch industry and iteratively develop a reusable rocket.

>>16047001
If you can afford to lose a thousand bucks or whatever, no reason not to shove it into the stock and just wait. At minimum you won't be waiting very long, they're launching again this year.

>>16047062
what the fuck, did an LLM write that tweet?

>>16047155
You AI whiners are as bad as the tranny seekers

>>16047131
They don't plan to fly the booster every 37 seconds. They plan to fly the booster with a turnaround time of several hours, and have many launch sites with many boosters available to achieve huge flight cadences.

>>16047131
nitrogen purging could just be a pre-propellant load procedure
how long would it even take? I doubt it would be too bad

>>16047012
more like the hole left after the US slashed NASAs budget by like ten times. but yes.
STS as part of the intended Space Transportation System was the only real way forward.

>>16047157
I'm serious, what does throttling down to 24,000 mph mean, that's not a simple typo

This conforms the booster flip during OFT-2 was completely nominal. Holy ****

>>16047001
I assume NASA is gradually going to winnow out underperforming CLPS contractors and impose more stringent requirements for what a company needs to achieve to qualify for milestone payouts. IM might not make the cut, in which case they are basically guaranteed to go bankrupt and all shareholders will be wiped out to zero. Currently, IM is a wildcard, because they failed to validate their normal landing system on IM-1, and so we have little ability to predict whether IM-2 and on will succeed

>>16047165
The last sentence is more retarded

>>16047162
less time than it takes to tank up the stage, and IRL they'd need to wait for a Starship to stack before starting prop loading, so the warm nitrogen purge would have quite a long time to work.

more data more better
>>16047017

>>16047166
I already knew that; it was evident

>>16047169
sure, but "underperformance" is defined differently under CLPS than normal, because one of the primary goals of CLPS is to have low cost Moon landers with cheap payloads, so that a higher level of risk can be accepted. if 2 out of 10 landing attempts fail, they don't care.

Daily reminder to Cancel MSR.

>>16047175
Is it not defacto cancelled already? I thought they paused work due to the budget projections going way over what was alotted

>>16047093
they only built it last year. it hasnt been in testing for long. that one that landed on a runway was just flight test hardware.

>>16047173
You conveniently forgot:fluid hammer

>>16047165
you ever hire a social media manager to manage your tweets and then they fuck up all the technical shit?
it's like that

>>16046544
reminds me of me on my new job.
>Try something
>doesn't work
>tweak something
>try again
>doesn't work again

>>16047174
NASA will probably start to care when there are some companies whose landers have been proven to be more reliable than others

The point is to nurture an industry, and once there are some companies that are proven effective, there's not much point in continuing to fund the stragglers and flailing failures

>>16046544
This could be bad

>>16047181
Upon further analysis I believe an indian man wrote that post, thanks

To produce one P120 solid rocket motor, it takes 3,500 km (2,200 mi) of carbon fibre, wound over 33 days in a climate controlled room held at 21 °C to make the motor's 25 cm (9.8 in) thick walls.

>>16047192
it's difficult to tell the difference between chatGPT and an Indian man sometimes

>>16047169
>underperforming CLPS contractors
they're currently the best preforming CLPS contractor

>>16047175
chinese bugman hands typed this post

>>16047188
Again, I agree with that. To rephrase and hopefully be more clear, I think the lander from intuitive machines has been a success in NASA's opinion. Obviously if their next 3 attempts fail to even reach Lunar orbit they may not buy into their services any further.

>>16047193
Sounds shitty, just use metal jackets
>muh performance
Stop using solids if you care about performance
>muh cost
LRBs can be cheaper, skill issue

>>16047204
It's all just politics at the end of the day when it comes to big projects.
Whenever you see how 'one design was selected over another' it's likely because one group had more connections than the other group.
It's that simple.

>>16047200
JPL hands typed this post on a diamond studded iphone

>>16047193
you think they could get away with just buying OTS fiberglass cloths and epoxying them together into a thick tube? sounds a hell of a lot cheaper and not all that much heavier or lower performance

>>16047200
MSR simply doesn't matter now that Starship is obviously going to succeed as, at the very least, an economical super heavy lifter. Maximally, we would have crew on Mars by 2030, but even if crewed Starship never exists, doing MSR for $150m inside a 50 tonne mass budget would be easy.
China can have their coveted dozen grams of Mars sand, it won't matter when America is industrializing the Moon and performing manned landings on Mars.
Soviets getting a man to orbit 1st then shitting and farding while America walks on the Moon, all over again, but with chinese characteristics

>>16047208
I'm perfectly aware. I'm saying they should just tell the truth. "we are using solids because that helps prop up our military industry, and we're using carbon fiber jackets to claw back some payload mass budget due to the shitty performance of solids as orbital launch hardware". Is it really so hard to not tell lies?

>>16047211
The move to CFC walls doesn't add much performance at all, because these are low Isp side boosters. If we were talking about a solid kick stage motor, sure, minimize the dry mass, but a side booster? I'd imagine it takes a 15 kg dry mass reduction on a side booster to achieve 1 additional kg of payload mass. It sure makes them more expensive than steel tubes though

>>16047212
Okay well MSR is still going to happen as “conventionally” (old-space way of doing things) as it possibly can. They’re not just gonna let that money pig die off without everyone getting their share of the cookie jar

>>16047165
I get what is meant by it. It’s like saying you saw a cop on the freeway when you were going 80 so you “throttled down” to 60. Technically incorrect but whatever who gives a shit

Whos the most handsome astronaut ever? To me is cernan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfH0nnzOvS8
by the time JUICE even gets to jup I'll be an old fuck
gravity assists are kino but having to wait 10 years is just suicide inducing

>>16047231
Sorry but John Young and Michael Collins share the award

>>16047236
people build their careers around a single mission like this, I guess its good for job security

>>16047231
Kek youre an actual faggot kys

>>16047231
>>16047242
they are all giga chads compared to todays onions infused "males"

>>16047092
>click bait title

>>16047286
go back to twitter

>>16047231
Future Astronaut

>>16047286
WRONG!
fluoride in the water supply was making men weak, effeminate, and impotent even back them

>>16047222
well currently I'm pretty sure they're getting no money and doing no work on MSR so, nah I think that time may be over.

>>16047229
It's incorrect though, the spacecraft was never going that fast in the Moon's sphere of influence, and even if it did go that fast while getting pushed to TLI, the Earth's gravity did most of the slowing down from that velocity.

>>16047236
The only acceptable gravity assist is off of Jupiter. Anything else is a failure of mission design.

>>16047288
No its not. if it was "then this happened" it would be a click bait title. "did not go as planned" just described it accurately.
She could have said "it didnt work" but that is kinda presupposed in "not as planned"

>>16047297
remember when you used to be able to grav slingshot through the sun in KSP and it would just break the game and shoot you out at FTL speeds

>>16047293
check out the so called "men" in tiktok and the other faggot catboys and shit. its over basically is what im saying. if Jack Ripper was right fluoride must have a delayed reaction

>>16047289
i never even used twitter you mongrel. ive been on 4chan since you were still sucking your mothers teats, ie 2010

>>16047097
the poo stuff

>>16047307
the right shit

>>16047215
You would be amazed how many people would get upset if they knew the real reason for the SRB mafia.

Anyone else read this?

tl;dr:
>wait and go big on settlement, need many different professional coprs to sustain one
>many questions are still unanswered/challenges unsolved
>need more data
>rushing into things too soon could cause international crises
>capacity for settling space scary because it means capacity to fling shit at earth

It's kind a of downer but they make solid arguments.

>>16047330
No they dont
Basically saying you cant do that because its too hard
Not a real argument

>>16047330
The authors are Jewish and hate Elon. Opinions discarded.

>>16047286
>>16047242
>>16047231
>>16047293
>>16047301
>>16047304
Reminder that fawning over how other men look as a man makes you a closetted homosexual gay cocksucking faggot

>>16047330
do you have any idea how many people died colonizing the american frontier? I don't but I'm sure it was a lot. Mars gets infinitely easier when you accept that sometimes people are going to die on it.

>>16047342
closeted?

>>16047330
So dont go because I said so? Yeah no fuck off.

>>16047250
>>16047342
Why are you so insecure that you cant tell when a man is good looking?

>>16047350
ESL

>>16047353
>trying to flip the script and deflect
running away from the truth? as expected of faggots

>>16047218
Equationfags, is it better to save 1 kg on the lower stages, or on the upper stages?

>>16047286
The ones you constantly want to fuck? Gaywad

>>16047330
>Can we settle space
Yes.
>Should we settle space
Yes.
>Have we really thought this through?
Fuck off, naysayers.

>>16047375
Real life concern trolling

>>16047365
that's right, on the lower stages. because the lower stages are heavier than the upper stages

>>16047330
Jews want to keep us on Earth, what's new? They are control freaks if you havent noticed. If you go to Mars, how can they control you?

>>16047385
Zubrin is also Jewish but he's one of the biggest support of manned space exploration, explain this.

>>16047382
These are the same cunts who go "wE nEeD tO fIx eVerYtHiNg oN eArTh fIrsT!".
Fuck 'em.

>>16047392
jews are a convenient boogieman for any situation. they're not ubiquitous but they are common enough in the upper levels of most industries and branches of government in the united states that you can point to one in a position of power who expresses any opinion you don't like.
but with 15 million or whatever in the US of course there are also going to be prominent ones with the opposites of those opinions.

>>16047392
With maybe the exception of his latest book, Zubrin has been an avid critic of Starship and colonization of Mars generally. His architecture is built around flags and footprints, not a permanent presence.

>>16047344
Jamestown (1607) was the first permanent English settlement in America, and was very successful. 80% of the colonists died between 1609-1610.

>>16047300
kek yeah
some ksp youtuber found a way to reliably glitch under the surfaces of any solid object and pull off the same ultraslingshot maneuver too, that wasn't too long ago

>>16047315
Have more faith in me. I am 100% certain that all normies everywhere would be enraged to learn that NASA has never built a rocket, for example.

>>16047330
Not a single solid argument exists inside that book. It is concern trolling at best.

>>16047404
He has mentioned Mars colonization and how his architecture can be leveraged to accomplish that ever since its first public presentation you silly billy
https://youtu.be/vD3U0QcEYXs?si=m9qcnxfsU0efFsyL
53 minutes in.

>>16047423
Sorry,you cant colonize Mars with a tuna can

>>16046524
oh no no /Spaceflight/ bros

>>16047431

>>16047298
Obviously the schizodrive is a scam but her "FAIL" makes it look like the test was negative, not that the test was never performed. And the picture communicates nothing.
Every video she puts out has some breathless urgent title, and her pulling some concerned face.

>>16047434
She'e extra spiteful about it you can tell
>>16047098

>>16047330
>capacity for settling space scary because it means capacity to fling shit at earth
This is horseshit. Why don't you "fling" a rock at Venus if it's so easy.

>>16047330
Book is deliberately shit, as explained here:
https://planetocracy.substack.com/p/review-of-a-city-on-mars-part-i

https://www.youtube.com/live/w6L-dP8amzk?si=6p93L3XqfClegTg6
watch this to be inspired

>>16046785
>>16046832
The reason for this is mass optimization: Superheavy was spending literal tons of mass on ullage gas and the higher the temperature of the gas, less mass needs to be spent on it for the same ullage pressure. It's a reduction in the order of many tens of tons - remember that they aren't using helium but much heavier O2 and CH4 gas.
High temperature methane gas is simple: there is a pure source of very hot supercritical methane from the regenerative cooling system. Tap that directly and you're good to go.
High temperature oxygen gas is much harder: there is no pure source of high temperature O2 because it is not used for regeneratively cooling the combustion chamber. LOX does regeneratively cool the LOX preburner but it wouldn't be nearly as hot as the methane side. There is simply no source of heat large enough on Raptor that isn't already spoken for by the methane.

Redbull should buy a Falcon 9 launch, have that guy jump off again at the top

President Nikki Haley will fund the Mars program
>>16047442

>>16047425
whether you disagree it could be done doesn't change the fact that Zubrin has been pro-Mars-colony since day 1.

>>16047433
>>16047431
>too retarded to attach image in the same message
says enough about space flight bros that youre getting your opinions from nasa but holy fuck literal subhuman room temp iq gorilla levels of stupidity

>>16047443
They had heat exchangers for boiling oxygen on previous engines. They tried deleting them. Now they'll either choose to deal with ice contamination or they'll choose to add them back in. Either way the added mass is minimal, this is about making Raptor simpler, not lighter.

>>16047456
typical /spaceflight/ arrogance, I was betrayed by the captcha

fact is even Nasa agrees its space flight not spaceflight, it's so over...

>>16047447
no, all the way to orbit and back again

>>16047450
All politicians will 'fund' a spaceflight program but none of them ever include budgets that stop the oldspace pork. None of them have ever actually cared since Kennedy to give a proper budget and administration for it other than whatever is enough to look good. This us also clearly political and offtopic and you need to go back to /pol/ you disgusting politician cock sucker.

>>16047458
It's not the added mass of the heat exchanger, it's the added mass of the ullage gas from colder O2 gas.

>>16047092
It's interesting reading all the midwit comments on this video, total "IFLS" types mocking the whole idea outright, mocking the name quantum, agreeing with their authority figure presenter without question not really daring to use those critical thinking faculties

>>16047297
This

WHERES MY FUCKING MONEY???

>>16047297
gravity assist off deez nuts

>>16047463
Vote for Nikki Haley or you get trump

>>160472972
It was launched on the largest payload rocket ESA has. this was the only way to get it there on the Ariane V without cutting it down in mass so much to be pointless.

>>16047468
>agreeing with their authority figure presenter without question not really daring to use those critical thinking faculties
Yeah these kinds of sciencetubers always attract dickriders

>>16047481
was meant for
>>16047297

Raptor is too complex to work reliably.

>>16047482
For me its the way that the experiment is more in the spirit of science than just dicking around with endless theories and "thoonking" endlessly looking for ever more elusive explanations for the perfect equation "theory of everything" that modern physics has become

>>16047098
she is still mad because of an argument they had some years ago. also she was the one who blocked him first.

>>16047496
lmaoo I knew this latest video was just a way for her to keep beefing with him

>>16047098

>>16047490
>the technology was tested both by the Soviet Union and the United States before being abandoned
hmmmmmm
i wonder why

How do theses niggas develope a crew space program so fast? If im not wrong the gaganyaans design was done in 2021, and now they have the first test flight in june

>>16047507
Bootstrapping using Soviet/Russian know-hows
China did the same thing pretty much (YF-100/RD-120, Shenzhou/Soyuz, Mir/Tiangong).

>>16047098
>Made a post on 4chan in a Sabine thread about wanting her to do a QI video.
>A month or so later she makes a QI video.
Sabine browses 4chan confirmed.

>>16047505
It's becoming increasingly obvious that the complexity leads to tons of novel failure modes that were not anticipated. Engine failure can not be isolated to the degree that they would like, so a single engine failure is still very likely to lead to loss of vehicle

>>16047473
Why are you so obsessed with me? Always posting some picture of mine, you stupid fat fuck nigger

>>16047496
She believes in superdetermism so she has weird ideas about falsifiability and counterfactuals

>>16047519
I'm actually surprised that Raptors continue to fail at this stage in the program. Shoddy QC, or something fundamental about the design.

>>16047527
no Mueller magic

>While that redesign is happening, a new helicopter team is now working on a larger, more capable rotorcraft called the Mars Science Hexacopter (MSH) concept, which is a 6-rotor hexacopter the size of Perseverance, weighing 35kg, capable of travelling many kilometers and carrying ~5kg of payload. -TT

>>16047507
The Gaganyaan project has been slowcooking since 2006/7, although didn't start to get serious levels of funding until 2014.

>>16047539
that'd be cool. I want to see a martian vehicle really booking it across the surface. none of this 18 kilometers per decade bullshit. let's see 18 kilometers per day

https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/1762586399470170440
>You know how we developed a spacecraft to go to the Moon? And Mars? And spacecraft capable of reentry? And large communications constellation satellites? And then we called them all the same thing, Photon? Yeah, we fixed that.

>>16047546
I hate this company so much it's unreal

Pro-tip: short rocket lab

>>16047543
hell yeah

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/02/it-turns-out-that-odysseus-landed-on-the-moon-without-any-altimetry-data/
>Altemus said the mission experienced 11 crises. The first of these happened shortly after the Falcon 9 rocket's upper stage released the spacecraft into a translunar injection. The star trackers on board the spacecraft failed.
>Therefore, the last accurate altitude reading the lander received came when it was 15 kilometers above the lunar surface—and still more than 12 minutes from touchdown.
ACME lander.

>>16047577
Actual disaster. You cannot pull a win from this. Holy shit, pathetic. They are forcing me to admit that CSS was right, they need to pay for this crime.

>>16047577
>first disaster was after release
ok so theres no blame on spacex? good

>>16047577
Amazing that this act managed to dupe NASA into giving them millions. I guess there were very few options, but its just embarrassing

>>16047595
Easily worth if it they fix things for the second one.

>>16047577
what a tale of triumph
really remarkable that they managed to land on the fucking moon without actually having altimetry data

>>16047546
peter beck is so much more charismatic than musk it's ridiculous. he manages to clear the very high bar of not being grating to listen to

>>16047597
To what end? The payloads this thing is capable of sending are pretty useless as far as actually setting up infrastructure on the moon

>>16047546
>You know how we developed a spacecraft to go to the Moon
no. you did? when did it land?

>>16047617
Finally another spacecrft namedPuianoeer

>>16047619
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAPSTONE

>>16047546
Peter Beck is probably the most boring person to listen to

>>16047577
Wow, less problems than OFT-2? Amazing success!

>>16047464
They don't care about a few tonnes of gas. they care about hours of machine time & added conplexity of those heat exchangers. The tap off gasses were not appreciably hotter than the heat exchanger gasses after travelling all the way up thru the pipe to the top of the oxygen tank.

>>16047617
Could they have come up with more soulless names than these?

>>16047481
>>16047483
I'm aware. Choosing to launch on Ariane was a failure of mission design.

>>16047630
yeah, they could have named all of them photon

>>16047464
Now it makes sense. That really was a bold engineering move by SpaceX and hopefully the big ass 9 meter strainer they added will solve the problem. I worry about small particles of ice getting through and chewing up the impellers over time but I don't know if that's a legitimate issue or not. They probably don't know either.

>>16047526
superdeterminism is just determinism with a note that says the inherent randomness of quantum events doesn't change the fact that physical outcomes are still determined by those events.

>>16047527
*diesel engine eats sugar*
>I'm actually surprised that the LN60 continues to fail at this stage in the program. Shoddy QC, or something fundamental about the design.
no retard you gave it a hot supper

>>16047507
We're living in good times. We're about to see one of Glushko's super engines finally take someone into orbit when Starliner launches for CFT and India's getting ready to serve up the closest thing we'll ever see to a crewed Titan launch.

>>16047577
It came 11 times? no wonder it crashed.

>>16047632
Evropa has to launch of Evropean rockets. sorry if it takes longer. we wont cuck to amerimutts

>>16047658
>we wont cuck to amerimutts
You won't go to space either

>>16047291
>Muskrat gooning pic

>>16046704
POO IN LEO

>>16046699
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is mandatory reading

>>16047630
Lightning is kinda edgy

>>16046699
>sequels
They're very different, and kind of a bummer in the last third in a "humans? well they're just no good" kind of way, they're about the characters interacting on Rama II and not about the exploration of that alien habitat like the first is. If you're curious enough to wonder about it then give them a try, worst case scenario you stop.

>The company's CEO, Steve Altemus, told me the pinpoint precision of the Falcon 9 rocket's push toward the Moon afforded IM the time to address a star tracker problem.

Bullseye

>>16047679
Oh No ULAsisters! our precise orbit cope! what "niche" will we latch onto now?!?

>>16047577
so it turns out the most important experiment on the lander (the camera that watches the landing) isn't responding because they sat on it

>>16047602
>You thought ISS's orbit was annoying because of accommodating Baikonur?
>You should see what we had to do to work with the uplifted penguins.

strong buy signal

>Therefore, the last accurate altitude reading the lander received came when it was 15 kilometers above the lunar surface—and still more than 12 minutes from touchdown.

>>16047685
its not like we could refuse them

>>16047681
Falcon is optimised for LEO, Vulcan for GTO and beyond. no need for copium

>>16047690
when you phrase it that way its actually pretty impressive that it made it down in 1ish piece

>>16047693
it truly was an Odysseus moment

>>16047692
Precise orbits id ULA's biggest marketing claim.

>The company has an incredible photo of this moment showing the lander upright, with the snapped leg and the engine still firing. Altemus plans to publicly release this photo Wednesday.

>>16047065
>so if I were to land on the moon could I just take that lander or any of them?
Sure. Where you gonna put it, kid?
>>16047076
That was amazingly kino for 1979. (pic not related)

>Here we are nearly two decades later, and SpaceX is the most accomplished rocket company in the world. It has built a highway to orbit. Intuitive Machines is trying to extend the expressway to the Moon.

Damn Berger can write kino sometimes

>>16047708
Oh please. Wipe up your drool on the floor, why don’t you

>>16047712
highway to orbit is a good phrase

>>16047712
If you have any sense, you better invest every last cent in the company. been following stocks for years, this is big

>>16047707
>That was amazingly kino for 1979.
Especially for a tv show. That moon vista is very realistic.

>>16047716
invest in the company that had a dozen different failures on a small lander? the company that can't even upload images of the landing?

>>16047719
yeah, that one

>>16047719
Musk rockets keep blowing up yet you suck his dick daily

>>16047724
I am a strong critic of starship. The numbers don't lie with falcon 9. also, spacex owns the majority of active satellites orbiting the earth

>>16047729
IM owns the majority of american landers active on the moon

>>16047731
that's like saying that I own the majority of milk in my fridge

>>16047731
DAYUMMM get owned

>>16047732
spacex employees own the majority of the milk stored in spacex fridges

>>16047739

>>16047731
Even if these landers worked, the next one won't launch until the end of the year. It can carry max 100kg of customer payloads. So 100kg of dumb ass science experiments that do nothing. We need to be putting hundreds of tons per year on the surface to develop anything of value. Throwing laser experiments at the moon is a gigantic money pit that will embarrass NASA and make the CLSP look foolish to congress

>>16047745
sex0 with S28!

>>16047577
> Landed

Crashed. And you'll never be a real moon lander.

>>16047778
crash landed

>>16047783
Crashed crashed.

>>16047784
but enough about Luna 25

>>16046803
Nothing you wrote in anyway explains why no company has persued reusability as booster reuse is not a divisional factor on the class/size. Electron could have been easily designed to be reusable and have it land propulsively after launch--but Rocket Labs simply did not do that in favor of dunking the booster into the ocean. Their pursuit of reusability is with Neutron, but its unlikely to see flight until end of next year to end of 2026. SpaceX, moreover, engaged in reusability testing by building margins into their vehicle and experimented with landing AFTER the payload was successfully delivered to orbit. In essence, every other rocket company could do the same if it could afford to throw away boosters into the ocean with incredibly expensive engines by increasing the size of the vehicle 3-5% and adding in that extra bit of fuel which overall still costs exponentially less than the cost of the cumulative set of engines that takes the payload to orbit. At least for all vehicles that were set for LEO launches and not GTO/GSO.

The real reason is that the industry is filled with cowards and would prefer to maintain an expendable launch vehicle market in order to overcharge customers and governments to maximize the bottom line over driving innovation and capabilities forward into the next decade.

>>16046968
SpaceX landed Falcon 9 in December of 2015. The first official payload of 60 satellites to orbit didn't occur until https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Starlink_and_Starshield_launches May 24, 2019. That's a 4 year gap where SpaceX continued to fly and land boosters with no iterable payload to make use of that extra capability: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANv5UfZsvZQ&t=27s December 21, 2015.

So that's 4 years and 7 months of continuous flights and landing.

>>16047794
And they were losing money in all those years

>>16047796
So fucking what dude. Every company in existence loses money until it doesn't either by going bankrupt or making through the 1% wall and becoming profitable. It's do or die. Literally cycle of life in the market. That's not a gotcha you think it is.

>>16047546
>>16047617
Wow it's fucking nothing
Let me know when Neutron launches this year... it is launching this year... right?

what's the next big chunk of US spy sat stuff to be declassified? we know a good deal about CORONA. read a book about it. Are 90s spy sats slated for a declassification sometime soon?

t. totally not Joe America from Ohio oblast

>>16046902
>no dark skins
jeet-sama I...

>>16047801
>it is launching this year... right?
lol no. archimedes hasn't been test fired.

>>16046914
The hardware rich iteration also comes from building the ships even if they're scrapped. Flight rate is only 50% of the equation. The other 50% comes from figuring out all the techniques and engineering options necessary in order to mass produce these ships. For Starship to even match Falcon 9 cadence, they need to be able to build 71 Starships in total: https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fzn6luiemkn981.png as there are 71 Falcon 9 boosters that have come and gone since inception. They're currently at Ship 32. So barely under 50% of the way to total production volume of the F9 cores.

If you build something and scrap it, for it to never have been flown, and you learned something significant enough that the next iteration of your build produces an article that's superior in performance and safer in integrity, then the cost of building and scrapping a ship or booster or both is worth it even if it never left the ground. That's what hardware rich means, not that every single booster and ship MUST fly to be considered the same. Every ship until it launches the first payload to orbit that isn't concrete or a block of cheese is a prototype and therefore is afforded maximum leeway for all actions taken with it or without it.

>>16046983
this kills the attention whore

>>16047024
>Intuitive Machines
>build a machine that wasn't intuitive enough to account for lateral velocity during landing, causing a tip over on surface contact
>stock drops by 60% in 5 days
There should be a medal for lack of intuition.

>>16047788
Everything in that post is explaining why various groups haven't done it or haven't done it yet.

>Electron could have been easily designed to be reusable and have it land propulsively after launch
First, it's not that easy to design, and second, that would have left Electron with too little payload to be a viable product. Just adding some parachutes eats too much of Electron's margins for a lot of its customers.

>by increasing the size of the vehicle 3-5% and adding in that extra bit of fuel
And also completely redesigning the first stage because most existing designs couldn't handle the requirements of both launch and a propulsive landing.

You're right about most of the existing players preferring to maintain the expendable status quo, but just writing them all off as "cowards" just shows you're too dumb to get why the status quo was the way it was.

>>16047801
"2 years"

>>16047814
best time to buy

>>16047624
that's cap

>>16047665
hi yanderedev!

>>16047820
I'm unironically thinking of picking up some stock

>>16047814
Delightfully counterintuitive

>>16047592
CSS was right for the wrong reasons. It's not really a win.

>>16047784
No, landed crashed. The probe did not encounter unplanned disassembly.

>>16047820
It'll probably sink a bit lower until it maybe recovers end of next week or the week after. There's still room for it to drop.

>>16047546
>calling your probe bus Explorer
kind of a shitty move desu

>>16047878
Not as egregious as Starship, the LEO bus

>>16047802
90s miltech is alien wunderwaffe by our enemies' standards so not for a while.

>>16047887
Eh, that's kind of stupid but it's not trying to piggyback off the success of a long-running NASA program.

>>16046218
Does it actually insulate well enough? The usually described TUFROC formulation uses silicon carbide foam in the cap but still requires the silica fibre base. I don't think I've ever seen a solely ROCCI tile be proposed although the patent makes it sound like it should be possible.

So what do 2weeksbros think of the NET March 8 date?

why the FUCK is pluto-charon not designated a binary system? They're 2 objects of comparable mass orbiting a common center, what more could you want?

>>16047932
They are designated as a binary system? Are you posting FROM pluto or something its been this way for a while

What are some /sfg/ approved games? I finished Outer Wilds, nice flying mechanics

>>16047934
Not real spaceflight back to /v/

Has ROSCOSMOS made any statement on IM-1?

Hell ISRO didn’t even say anything about it either

>>16047934
mars really needs some terrain other than red sand

>>16047935
Outer Wilds is a game that involves very much spaceflight

>>16047935
found the nigger who killed this general

>>16047933
there's technically still no formal definition for a binary planet, the barycenter thing is just the most popular one.

>>16047943
Its not a planet retard

>>16047943
It's a planet retard

Belter scum out in full force I see. Your shitty insignificant speck of a planetoid with a wonky orbit cant even hold a fucking atmosphere and will never be a planet. I say that to Cerescels and Plutoids

>>16047937
they are both to busy huffing the copium

>>16047938
There's snow too, sorta. The whole place needs more green though.

>>16047943
*barrycenter
thanks Obama

>>16046825
>moon crasher
kino

>>16047938
Lots of black sand

>>16047745
Why are they brown?

>>16048026
Boca Chica

Tory Bruno is so cool he plays Kerbal just like me

>>16047931
Booster is going back to the launch site tomorrow

>>16048026
You ever been to Texas? I'm generally pale but 3 months there made me look mexican.

>>16046914
Spacex is finding a lot more crippling problems on every test than Saturn had

>>16048064
Saturn rockets were significantly less complex than Starship. One must be reusable and have the capability to land basically to the meter accuracy on the tower, the other doesnt and also doesnt have nearly as much technology. This is like comparing a Blackberry and an iPhone 14.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FPABd398YRWhwPFR1kPbCCsH6KGofP-H/view

>>16048076
DONT CLICK IP LOGGER

>>16048078
lol sorry I shouldn't post drive links without context.
it's an interesting 250 page document by Volodymyr Stepanets about starlink usage for military

>>16048082
>no screenshot
yep definetly an ip logger thanks anon

>>16048085
yeah yeah whatever

They're putting raptors on the roadster

I want a horn here, here and here. You can never find a horn when you're mad.

>>16048095
Nobody gives a shit about T*sla.

>>16048095
It'll be a hybrid electric/turbine replacing two thirds of the battery space for a methane tank. The sport version also has a lox tank.

>>16048107
there is a Tesla in space right now

>>16048110
Put that motor in the old jag C-X75 concept car.

>>16048095
Its a roadster, so a small form factor is likely. On top of that, its got 0-60 of <1sec. That he says is the "LEAST" impressive part. Also says it will be unlike any other car, if you could even call it a car.

Maybe a flying drone type car?

>>16048146
Literally a Raptor and tanks with wheels+frame+cabin attached.

>>16048026
electron/neutron is black. starship is half black

>>16048095
>>16048146
I think he's just being a nutjob.

elon musk is based

>>16048152
B*sed

So these people can only look on passively because the sats they're worried dont have active avoidance mitigation right?

>>16048146
Literally a Raptor and tanks with wheels+frame+cabin attached.

>>16047546
this makes me much more optimistic about the survival of Rocketlab
perhaps there is a business here, though the satellite bus manufacturing business is crowded Rocketlab might have some special transferrable knowledge from launching that other satellite bus manufacturers won't have if they are pure satellite manufacturers

>>16047577
damn that was pretty cool
they did very well considering the circumstances, with some more luck maybe they would have stayed upright

>>16048026
Google Gemini produced that image

>>16047577
>The choice Intuitive Machines faced was whether to keep operating Odysseus for several more days on lower power as the Sun sank lower to the horizon or to use the juice when it had good line-of-sight communications with large satellite dishes back on Earth. That would mean losing most functions as soon as Wednesday.
>"The question is, do you want to limp along and stay alive with everything shut off?" Altemus said. "Or do you want to go on the Quasonix, when you have the big ear listening, and get all the data you can? And that's the decision we made, to go get all the data. It's not how long you stay alive. It's how much information you glean from this mission."

>>16048146
>aiming to ship next year
How long will the FAA delay this?

>>16047616
no they aren't, getting close spectrometry data and so on about the surface and perhaps even drilling down a bit will be very useful in choosing a location for a base or industrial site
these will be useful even if there is a human base on the moon
propulsively moving drones going around basically similarly to Ingenuity derived drones on Mars

>>16047801
Neutron is DOA anyway, these satellite buses might actually be a viable business, though not a big one right now
but that will grow with Starship opening up space for commercial activities in a big way

>>16048095
Draco, not raptors.

>>16047807
this very much so, seems to be unknown or ignored most of the time
getting good at manufacturing is part of being hardware rich and a big reason why SpaceX is so cheap, its not only about the reusability itself
they would probably be much cheaper even if they didn't have reusable boosters

>>16048095
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1762725318026989667

>>16048213
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1005699514630471680

rest of the 2018 thread

>>16048214
https://twitter.com/Erdayastronaut/status/1005876025258074112

>>16048216
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1005874658015522816

>>16048146
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1762718427775410295

replies to this thread

twitter flood general

>>16048220
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1762717716585030000

>>16048218
have they done anything at all with the Sabatier reaction since this tweet from... hmm, when was i- SIX YEARS AGO?

>>16048226
Sabatier reaction doesn't have a useby date. No rush.

>>16048226
Mueller worked with mars ISRU the last 5 years he was at SpaceX, so I guess between 2015-2020

>>16048163
lmao is he insane enough to try and grab the land speed record

>>16048226
chemistry is not possible

>>16048220
2.7gs lol

https://twitter.com/peterdevietien/status/1762722928833986734

>>16048229
Why was Mueller fired though?

>>16048239
wasn't fired, he just didn't want to be some middle manager
doing his own company the returns on time might be much bigger, he has more freedom and can work on rocket engines again
I think he also said that the work life balance is a bit better now compared to at SpaceX

>>16046699
>curious if the sequels are worth reading.
I would like to say absolutely not, but let's just say it's very visible they were mostly written by someone else.

>>16048181
>some more luck maybe they would have stayed upright

IM-1's "pinpoint accurate AI" decided to set down, in a rocky crater, on a steep 12% slope. There was no "just missed sticking the landing" here.

Staging

>>16048299
>>16048299
>>16048299
>>16048299
>>16048299

>>16047605
It just means they didn't cheap out on the inertial measurement unit

>>16047932
binary systems do not exist.

>>16046544
It's probably to do with the lack of consumables at the launch site, when they did the WDR they hadn't finished installing all the new horizontal tanks yet so they were just relying on the two/three old tanks to supply all the needed water and LN.

Also not sure of how far along the protective cladding on the launch tower was at that point.