/sci/ - Science & Math

What am I going to do with all these sunshades for the April eclipse

I wouldn't trust the safety of my eyes to something with a NASA logo on it

>>16080136
When NASA wants to do a deep space mission using NEP.

>obligatory launch vehicle

Id rate this a low C higher B tier thread

>>16080220
liquid boosters when

>We can feel and hear it in our houses in Brownsville, about 20 miles from the launch site. On clear days you can see the launch as well. POWER

Man, people are not gonna put up with high cadence launches of Starship neither in Texas nor Florida, I can feel it

>>16080221
Low B high C*

After yesterday's failure, does spaceX even have a path forward anymore?

I'm sorry anon but no Trump allowed

BRILLIANT PEBBLES

>>16080229
No. All that remains for them is to turn 360 degrees and walk away

>>16080223
They work fine on ksp

>>16080223
Using what engines?

>>16080229
how does it feel to be dumb?

>>16080238
strap two shuttles to the sides and call them flyback boosters

>>16080220
I hope someone at NASA can convince the admins that we need one on the moon. Lunar nights are long and cold. Sadly it'll probably only be considered after the Chinese stick one up their.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nh7u_gneiao
T-20:00, hopefully

>>16080225
They said the same thing about airports and railway stations

How many NK-33 engines does Russia have left for Soyuz-2.1v?

>>16080251
Can't hear either from 20 miles away

>>16080259
You can if there's an approach path or railway near your house

>>16080267
Delulu

>>16080268
Happens when you grow up being doused in avgas exhaust

phew, seems like SpaceX fixed their erector clamp problem. T-2m for next Starlink launch.

liftoffu

>>16080253
is the flickering in the clouds real?

>>16080278
When we will see a nighttime Starship??
>127k watching
Is that normal for a starlink?

>>16080284
Those are soundwaves, yes. Like in old WW2 films of explosions.

19th safe landing. lets see if we make it back to port this time

>>16080258
In 2013 NPO Energomash said that they had 20 of the original NK-33s left in storage and that they could get 10 flight capable units out of those parts, but there have been 12 launches since then. In 2014 OAO Kuznetsov said they had restarted some part of the NK-33 production line so the current 2-1v are probably flying on a mix of old and new components.

>>16080289
youre so sad for following this failed rocket. SpaceX promised full and rapid reusability and then they jsut foget it nd move on to the exact same grift with a larger vehicle. sad.

>>16080289
F9 would have to explode to make me care about it again

>>16080144
>Starship S28
>100,000 kg
Not so fast, Ivan.

https://www.faa.gov/media/76836
>p. 45
>Some residual propellant (approximately 30,650 kg in the headers and approximately 70,000 kg in the mains) would remain in Starship.
AmeriGODS win again.

>>16080295
>>16080299
I am reveling in the fact that these launches are becoming so routine only train spotting tier autists follow them. For those of us who waited years for the shuttle's returns to flight, this is cool

>>16080207
hey OP, if I could offer you some constructive criticism: only stage with pictures of trump if they're topical or nothing more interesting is currently happening.

>United Airlines Boeing 737 makes emergency landing in Oregon after losing panel in mid-air

>>16080307
ass first engines got fucked

>>16080207
should I go see the solar eclipse in person? it's ~1 hour train ride away from me for ~15% of the way into the totality zone

I love the faint clouds floating in the bay

>>16080308
Time to sacrifice another whistleblower to the dark gods of aviation

>>16080321
100% totality or nothing. I drove to bumble fuck nowhere SC and watched it on the side of the road in 2019

>>16080331
the place I'm looking at going to is 100% totality according to this site, i'm not sure if being this far off from the center line matters much though

>>16080337
You'll get the full effect, but the time of complete totality will be just a little less. Idk what the traffic situation in Canada will be, but you're probably better off there than trying to cross the border that day - it will probably be a shitshow

Hi /sfg/ Do you remember me? im the "when are we leaving this planet bros" guy again, yes, last time i said im never going back here, but after the IFT3 I couldnt help it. I just want to tell you guys about my life cause I consider you my friends at this point. After going to therapy theses last months, I accept interstellar travel is just impossible and my life got better. My psychologist told me I should be one with the nature, so I start walking barefoot on grass, hugging threes and going to parks and rivers. i dont want to go to mars, or visiting other planets or stars anymore, because I realized theres no place as beautiful as our planet home in the universe and how lucky I am to be here. Now im not obsessed with space travel anymore, and im happier than ever. Thanks you guys for making me see how stupid I was

>>16080345
Imagine that feeling, but in a generation ship otw to a distant solar system. The stars are our birthright, and they will be ours.

>>16080337
Probably loses you like ~1 minute but you'll still have almost 3 mins. There are websites that tell you how much time it'll be in your specific location.

>>16080347
>generation ship
whatever makes it out of it will have no resemblance to primates

Coming to theaters soon™

>>16080345
no one gives a shit

>>16080353
Nice porno name.

>>16080350
>we won't have a flying machine for a million years

>>16080353

>>16080353
god I hope IFT-4 is able to make it through reentry,
the kino will be unmatched

>>16080345
>psychologist convinces anon to give up on space and hug trees and shit
very sad. sadder still that you're proud of it

>>16080358
>>16080350
Though I do agree that we should wantonly GMO ourselves to suit whatever non earth habitats we find ourselves in until we eventually turn into the Flood from halo

>>16080207

>>16080314
i bet the engines took the heat better than the dorsal skin did. columbia's engines survived the breakup and ended up making craters in the ground.

>2024
>Have telescopes that can supposedly see several trillions of miles away
>Nobody has taken a picture of the Apollo 11 landing site

>>16080393
yeah they have

>>16080393
Did you pull that pepe from your department's image server? kek.

>>16080400
Thanks, I couldn't find these images anywhere

>>16080420
this actually looks like vfx you would see from a high-budget Hollywood movie

>>16080420

>>16080423
turns out nature has the best special effects of all

>>16080423
most cool things do

>>16080437
No, this one just looks "real" but the starship one has a cinematic vibe.
I think it's the reflection of the plasma and the earth on the ship.

>>16080431
analog is just better

>>16080440
Also the angle
This shot is from First Man

>>16080337
I just checked the map a couple of hours ago, once you're in the totality stripe, you don't have to go very far in to get to 2 minutes.
The Alamo will be just outside of totality.

is the crew version of Starship also gonna roll to its side during ascent?

>>16080461
Why not? Decreases drag a lot.
Since you aoa is in pitch.

>>16080474
Yeah, but I got confused since every animation I've seen of Starship's launch shows it with the heatshield up or down, but never to the side.
I didn't even realize that it rolled like that until CSI Starbase pointed it out in his recent video.

>>16080478
Well it's the lowest drag position.
Also drag on the top of the stack is really bad for controls.

>>16080479
Yeah I know from trying out inline shuttle designs in KSP lol

We. Are. Going.

>>16080308
The seething from Boing fanboys is amazing
>t-the plane was 25 years old
>ITS UNITEDS FAULT THE PLANE IS NOT PROPERLY MAINTAINED!
Will they blame NASA if starliner fucks up?

Thinking about how you would design the crew compartment on a mars transit starship.

To start of with, the space is totally reasonable.
There is constant hemming and hawing about crew mental health living in space for prolonged periods of time in research spaces, however the reality is that ever since the introduction of nuclear powered submarines, these kind of mission durations in a confined space are fairly routine.
6 months underwater with 150 crew has been done, 4 months with 20 in a similar space will be fine.

The primary design driver for crew ergonomics will likely be radiation mitigation.
The ship will need a radiation bunker that can hold all of the crew in the event of a solar flare.
I think it would make sense if this also functioned as the crew sleeping area as this is really the low hanging fruit for dose reduction; 1/3 of the time your crew are completely stationary and can be easily shielded.
This area would likely be at the core of the ship and would use supplies like water, food and mission systems for protection.
One thing to consider is that you don't necessarily need as many beds as you need crew, on military vessels crew will operate on separate shifts and actually share beds in turns, this can potentially reduce the space required for sleeping.

Contrary to some flashy proposals, the access chute or stairway between levels would go up the side of the ship as crew would ultimately spend little time in this area and it could be the least shielded part of the ship.
The takeoff and landing positions could also be located somewhere without much protection as the crew will rarely use them, potentially up at the nose of the ship.

>>16080507
How will they deal with cum in space?

>>16080420
imagine the kino footage we'll get when spacex manages to reenter this thing without it tumbling over itself like a drunken sailor.

>>16080517
just eat it

>>16080361
Old

>>16080507
All depends on crew size. With small crew, you can have relatively luxurious accommodations with plenty of room for amenities and rad shielding. I'd think the initial voyage would have 1 crew lander with like 5-10 crew max, and at least 1 or 2 more supply landers with stuff they can set up on the surface/use as back up return vehicle/ hold enough supplies to hold out for another transfer window if they can return for some reason

>>16080517
Fed to quail chicks

>>16080523
if they can get that thing to re-enter with continuous live footage all the way, I will have such a boner

>>16080481
post your inline shuttle designs, anon

>>16080240
Saving this. I remember hearing 1 Starship a day Elon you better god damn deliver

>>16080544
>>16080481
Fuck off skittle lovers

>>16080549
skittles are nasty-ass fruity trash, now post your fucking KSP shuttles

Boeing deserves to get assfucked by the FAA for longstanding institutional issues, but most of this current drama is just confirmation bias.
These kinds of minor incidents happen a lot, they just don't typically make the news, because usually people don't find them interesting.

It's actually incredible and kind of disappointing to see how normies have no self awareness about this kind of thing.
It's important to be aware of this phenomena when we are more responsible than ever for finding our own information about the world.

>>16080240
is this a reference to Josephs dreams? eleven ears of corn and all that?

>>16080564
>These kinds of minor incidents happen a lot
The don't, I've read all NTSB aviation incident reports for over a decade as part of my job and what been happening recently is unusual and excessive

>>16080358
the joke's on you
that was written 20 million years ago

>>16080517
just cum on the girl
after that it's her problem

>>16080328
I think what we're looking at is a digital noise (it goes as a horizontal line across the screen)

>>16080328
Uhh does this mean there's propellant leaking into the cargo bay?

>>16080585
It's moist air that got carried up to space.

>>16080386
would painting the shuttle external tank (or at least the shuttle facing half of it) in this have prevented foam strikes?

>>16080613
Yes

It would also destroy the payload capacity

>>16080393
you don't even take high res pictures of the moon from earth. you need to take them from lunar orbiting spacecraft like the LRO

>>16080613
foam strikes happened on sts-1 too. you can't really tell because nasa never really got a good handle on the dynamics of foam falling off the tank, but i bet paint flakes hitting the tiles would've caused more problems than it prevented in the long run.

>>16080386
Columbia breaking up is always so morbidly fascinating to me, but its taboo so I can only discuss it on an Indonesian carpet cleaning forum.

What happened to the astronauts? Were they killed instantly? By what? Did they ignite and their limbs break off?

Reading the stories of the people finding astronaut remains in the recovery effort implied that they were recognisable/identifiable to some degree. Were their faces intact or was their flesh burnt up?

>>16080618
>but i bet paint flakes hitting the tiles would've caused more problems than it prevented in the long run.
you really believe this? the only time they really got in trouble was when a multi-pound foam chunk greater in size than a briefcase struck the wing leading edge

>>16080641
https://www.asma.org/asma/media/asma/Travel-Publications/NASA%20Shuttle/SP-2014-616.pdf
this has the answers you seek, it's a good read
basically they were rendered unconscious very very quickly due to being exposed to near vacuum with no suits or helmets on

>>16080615
Kek, this old oft-spoke retardation, if a few hundred pounds of anything could kill your payload capability than you never should have built the thing in the first place (and it wouldn't have). Personally I think a light weight but strong net, worn like a tight fitting sock over the top half of the tank, and woven of kevlar thread with a sub-6 inch cell size would have kept the damn foam from shedding "big enough to be dangerous" pieces onto the orbiter.

Why are there so many doomer headlines saying that starship was lost? No shit it was gonna get destroyed one way or another? Does SECO not matter at all? Any other vehicle would have declared that a complete success but I guess the goal posts have to get moved because it's a Musk company and he sometimes says things that makes journalists look stupid.

>>16080656
>Space Shuttle, but wearing stockings
hot

>>16080666
thank you, Satan

>>16080666

>>16080461
>the crew version of Starship

Thats never gonna happen

>>16080229

Apparently not. Sad really.

>>16080619

200m/pixel from Palomar, but 5m/pixel with the VLA.

anyone has the "water tower" collage?

>>16080552
Take your redditroon meme and gtfo tourist
>>16080564
Damage control kikes in full force I see. Your company failed 33 of 89 audits, and FAA directly said "it wont be back to business as usual." You cant escape this situation that YOU brought upon yourselves, stop trying to make it seem less than it really is because its not working.

>>16080507
nice insight. the psychological environment of 200+ people on a sub isnt exactly the same as a dozen people on a starship. however the crew going to mars would have the advantage of be able to send messages and vid-dox to their friends and family at home, which I don't think nuclear submarine crew are allowed to do because of the stealth.
ladder anywhere but the middle also makes sense, aswell as crew quarters in the central.

Here's my quick take on how a single deck could be organised.

>>16080689
you mean starship will never get off the pad? too many engines firing at once, it'll be the N1 all over again

I wish to know the cause of the booster's failure

>>16080253
The rocket exhaust doesn't do anything to the cloud that's how you know it's fake.

>>16080732
Plumbing or flight controller issue during boostback results in the booster's burn ending too soon. Booster ends up dropping in a near vertical orientation and runs into severe wind shear at high mach. Booster is put into a roll moment that the control loop and flight surfaces aren't able to compensate for. The boostback issues and roll oscillation combine to result in far too few engines being in their start box and two of the three flame out before the booster meets its high speed demise.

>>16080651
neat. I didn't know their bodies were flying through the air outside the shuttle after it broke up.

>>16080742
I noticed the booster was oscillating before the engines even turned on. And when the engines did turn on their distribution was asymmetrical

Just how automated are the Starship missions? Can they override something if they think the computer is fucking it up, or do they just program in all the possibilities they can think of and hope they didn't forget anything?

>>16080689
hey if they have to launch Dragons with crew up to single-launch 250 ton stations then so be it, or mate two together and make a 500 ton station even better

>>16080691
>It's over.
KEK

>>16080725
no sub has ever had 200+ crew, you could have said 100+ and been correct

>>16080754
almost entirely automated.
here's a fun fact: F9 is programmed to know the location of important buildings around the cape. So if it is really going off course on landing, it will attempt to miss like the VAB.

>>16080767
so what are all the people in the control room doing?

>>16080770
browsing sfg

>>16080770
enjoying kino stream

>>16080767
>mfw it knows the location of FAA HQ

>>16080794
translation?

>>16080207
so, how "successful" was this launch with regards to reaching orbit?
in full expendable mode starship could theoretically launch actual payloads next week?

>>16080822
We don't know how well payload door worked and if it's uncontrollably spinning I don't think they could deploy payload.
We might see dummy payload next flight though.

>>16080816
According to someone on Xitter:
>It all comes down to clusters!
>30-combo cluster beats everything!
https://x.com/johnchen40904/status/1768900285441986602

What do you think our ayylmaos overlords are thinking of us after this launch? Are they proud of us?

>>16080822
it did reach (almost) orbit as intended, but it was tumbling all the way. they need two things: fix reaction control system and prove raptor relight in space. they wont put ship in actual orbit before they can deorbit it.

>>16080849
they don't exist dumb anime poster

Why again are hydraulics less precise than electric motors? (I am building a 6 axis robot arm again)

>>16080945
I would guess that hydraulics can theoretically be just as accurate given enough time, gearing, and money, but as a practical matter, I think they're hampered by not having any equivalent to the electrical stepper motor, by which rotation can be commanded in precise, discrete steps.

>>16080420
SpaceX has the heavenly mandate. There are goblins out there trying to stop them. But they land the boosters, win the contracts, win HLS with an interim NASA leadership team, and now Starship feels like it’s practically cruising its way into being operational.
SS still has a lot to prove but I imagine we are going to see a lot of Starship launches in the next five, six, seven years.

how do we punish people that program AI algorithms to post on anonymous online forums?

>>16080709
Not my company, the point is that they would have failed audits 5 or 10 years ago as well.
The FAA have been giving Boeing the soft touch for a long time now and they may finally toughen up which is good.

This news cycle is just a typical revolving door though, you can see it in how people use it to confirm whatever pre-existing bias they had (society is collapsing because of Woke/capitalism/diversity ect)

>>16080576
Surely there is an actual quantifiable change in the mishap rate you can cite?
Genuinely interested to see.

>>16081006
Do you have proof of this happening or are you just asking hypothetically

>>16080258
Isn't it being replaced by the RD-193? It's like the second best engine in the world after the Raptor.

>>16080666
>not showing her naked breasts from having the cargo doors open during orbit

I don't know shit about cargo doors and cargo in general, but isn't that door too small? I mean, surely it'll be fine to let small Starlink satellites being pushed out line a whore pushing out anal beads, but it doesn't seem practical for bigass payloads, like, I dunno, a fully realized JWST

>>16080770
they're there to report when the RUD happens

>>16081020
Have you even watched a single Starlink deployment? They're flatpaks. That's why all the references to "pez dispenser".

>>16081010
>>16080967

>>16081022
he's talking about non starlink payloads

>>16081020
it's unlikely there's anything that is being designed around starship's payload bay volume/dimensions that would need to be launched within the next couple years, by which time the whole system should be more mature and able to accommodate a change to something like the shuttle's payload bay doors, or the nosecone flipping off or something

the turbopump is the heart of the engine

I wonder if it's too late to buy airbus stock.

he can't getting away with it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blW-Fa4a10g

new manufacturing video dropped

>>16081088
not spaceflight
gb2/biz/

Guesses on IFT-2?
I'm going to guess late May

https://twitter.com/PhenomenalPoto/status/1768806587936674221

ban ended, time to start posting ragebait again

>>16081092

>>16081092
China offering this man 10 000$ for the tile.

>>16081093

any potential for cost reduction by building Starship out of reinforced concrete instead of steel?

>>16081091
I'm guessing it already happened

>>16081022
Pez aren't really flat though. They're more like Pogs.

>>16081092
>ecological disaster
How? I don't see the forbidden oreo's entering the foodchain.

https://twitter.com/thunderf00t/status/1768593340172259609

this one was particularly aggravating, I wonder if he is actually this retarded or if its just a way to drive engagement
with CSS I'm pretty sure its just unadulterated EDS, but with thunderfoot it sometimes seems like he is being disingenious and pretending to be more retarded than he actually is

>>16081105
>$3bn of tax payer money
Where did he even pull that shit from?

>>16081107
HLS award was 2.9bil

>literal garage tier door gets stuck open

If there was anyone doubting Dunning-Kruger being in full effect, here it is.
"NOW LOOK HERE I HAVE A DEGREE AND I RELEASE SCIENTIFIC PAPERS!"

>>16081110
They didn't launch a HLS vehicle, did they?

>>16081115
I'm not saying it makes sense, but that is where the number comes from
he brings it up multiple times in replies

https://twitter.com/thunderf00t/status/1768636451711811957

>>16081093
I don't know shit about tiles but I like how it looks like polystyrene from that side

>>16081121
Well, he is a fucking retard when it comes to space. I'll be sure to ask him if I ever need a baking soda chemical reaction question answered or whatever the fuck his thesis is about.

>>16081114
does he really have 3000 citations?

Anyone (specifically Thundertard; though there are many others) who argues Musk’s timelines are off by a few years / SLS worked “first time” compared to Starship is either a bad actor and/or a complete and utter nincompoop

>>16081125
At least he claims to. I don't care to go fucking look because I am not a chemist, like he is.

>>16081114
>musk is launching reusable rockets intp space while tendert0e makes youtube videos
lel
>papers
in these days of junk publishing that means nothing more than something to wrap your doobage in

>>16081126
SLS "worked" first time because they spent 3 decades computer modeling a minimum viable conservative rocket based on 60 year old parts.
And I'm tired of pretending otherwise. Boomerspace can suck my dick.

It's either keep exploding rockets or spend 30 years making one that would end up being at least 10 times more expensive

>>16081133
or just build a good rocket that works in 2 years like Germans did with Saturn V

>>16081092
>>16081103
Maybe he should have read the environmental assessment.

>>16080225
They are free to move.

>>16081136
I'm tempted to go toss a car battery in the ocean now just to spite that fag.

>>16080240
I don't enjoy it

>>16081114
Somebody mug him, it'd be funny.

>>16081136
>residual fuel
it's all cryogenics, what didn't vaporize immediately would just freeze the water until it evaporated, this is how you know it's all concern trolling

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1768810190718009446

>>16081154

>>16081155

https://twitter.com/BellikOzan/status/1768860455119065123

>>16081138
Not only are they free to move, they will be subsidized by rapidly increasing real estate prices.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCwtk7jRSgQ

>>16080207
Is there any way to make a space probe within the solar system to generate a signal which appear to be from another starsystem many lightyears away? I guess it can be always triangulated but i dont really know anything about it, is there a way?

>>16081163
but muh gentrification

>>16080225
>high cadence kino
sounds like something people will want to pay extra for

>>16081144
I don't recommend it. I already tried and all he had in his pockets was a guide to local gay bathhouses, a leather gimp mask and a so-called chastity cage. Still, I had a good time that weekend.

>>16081020
this shit has been floating around the internet for years now. they will use different "shell" designs for the ship based on what its deploying

MY TAX DOLLARS!!!

FELON MUSK!!!!!!!

This is a cool idea - basically a reverse railgun in LEO to brake rockets into orbit. It doesn't seem to require magic materials or any tech that doesn't already exist, unlike tethers/elevators/etc

https://medium.com/@rokomijic/the-space-runway-faq-8e5b2cbd6f7e

>>16081166
not really since if its orbiting the sun the signal source would be in motion. this would be apparent from doppler shift even if it was only a brief signal.

>>16081021

After all this time I'm just now noticing there was one moteor not firing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQMG75jnAtE
>Ringwatchers: The PEZ Dispenser

https://ringwatchers.com/article/ship-pez-dispenser
>The PEZ Dispenser: Starship's Payload Deployment System

>>16081173
Yeah, the pez dispenser was tested first because starlinks are apparently the first non-inert payloads.

>>16081166
There was a novel where part of the premise was a signal which seemed to originate from outside the solar system was actually only half a light year away.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ophiuchi_Hotline
>>16081176
Yeah, it has to be far enough away that you wouldn't notice the parallax. (And they would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling belters.)

>>16081175
How is it powered and cooled?

>>16081175
Is there a chance the track could bend?

>>16081114
>le dunning-kruger!
>his scientific qualifications only prove dunning-kruger since the more you think you know the less you actually know!
What if he said "so wheres you PhD in rocket science?", how do you respond to that without sounding like the biggest dunning-kruger of them all?
>err well I have been following the situation closely for a few years and ....

>>16081186
it says "solar array" right there
>fucking electromagnets
I think the hard part is getting lined up to it to start. I guess the payload goes through it like a railgun.

>>16081186
Braking and cooling are passive, re-boost via solar panels + Lorentz force against Earth's magnetic field

>>16081169
It's less about the haul and more about making a smug man cry.
>>16081180
"PEZ" is a branded name, isn't it?

>>16081175
tethers don't require magic materials and Starship is approaching or exceeding the theoretical $/kg to orbit that a space elevator would do
Starship is so good it is basically making space elevators obsolete (even if it was possible to build one on earth)

this and tethers might make stuff launched with Starship or a subsequent system even cheaper though, you would need to launch quite a bit of propellant just to keep this thing in orbit, but I guess the gain is that the station keeping engines on this thing would ultimately have better ISP than a Starship uppter stage?
so with large enough scale it would make $/kg cheaper (or perhaps you could even launch propellants from the moon with mass drivers to fuel these)

>>16080736
The exhaust is pretty much exerting all of its force straight down. The waves you see are just from sound.

>>16081175
>requires additional power generation equipment and large magnets on a spacecraft that already has fuel, tanks and engines
>requires megatons of completely inert mass in orbit
delightfully counterintuitive

>>16081197
how would you get extra speed from that? you can use the magnetic field to rotate or slow down, but for propulsion?

>>16081154
>Starship will be on Mars winthin 5 years
Damn it was supposed to be there 4 year ago though.

>>16081175
Uh... how does the track hold itself up if it's connected to the ground at one end?

>>16081166
As you say it can be triangulated.

>>16081176
but you wouldn't know the original frequency so how would you know it's doppler shifted

>>16081180
what's with the shitty undersampled render. just use eevee if you can't spare the cpu time

>>16081209
It's not connected to the ground. They claim they'll use ion thrusters

>>16081209
its not connected to the ground and apparently it uses ion thrusters (or some other high efficiency thruster)

>>16081210
I guess if it was a one off and didn't change over time you wouldn't notice the doppler shift. but any alien message need to be prolonged to ensure it wasnt reflecting off a satellite. also it would need to be coming from a particular star, which nothing orbiting the sun would be able to hold.

>>16080420
Looking at this actually turned me on.

>>16081209
american reading comprehension everybody

>>16081213
>>16081216
Oh, I see. Imagine having to launch perfectly with your theoretical magnet-rocket to catch that thing.

>>16081194
>how do you respond
I'm not running around on youtube and twitter pretending to be an expert on something I'm not, nor am I trying argument to authority with a degree that's not applicable.
This is a man who stated on stream that F9 ran on methane and was basically a redstone rocket.

>>16081207
like this. or just use ion thrusters

>>16081175
Are you telling me that we could get a 10x increase in efficiency by simply building a 150 km long self powered orbital megastructure and subjecting passengers to lethal accelerations?

Why hasn't anyone done it yet?

>>16081154
>starship on mars in 5 years
so they're aiming for 2029? it actually sounds legit.

>>16081175
>ASI will eat us
the what now

>>16081237
Artificial SuperIntelligence

>>16081237
Augmented Sexual Intelligence
we will make AI to fuck, but it will fuck us instead

>>16081201
>Starship is approaching or exceeding the theoretical $/kg to orbit that a space elevator would do
if space elevator $/kg estimations were done the way elon estimates starship $/kg then the theoretical cost would be 0.

>>16081252
$10/kg is starting to look more and more probable >>16081161

>>16080709
I've been posting space shuttles in launch threads since before you knew /sci/ talked about space

>>16081255
>One way space trips starting at $699.99 USD
Starship is crazy the more I learn about it. With it's payload capacity, reusability, and price it seems like I could live to see a noon base or even a mars base.

>>16081225
TRL of this contraption?

>>16081261
yes

>>16081261
>One way space trip
This is all I've ever wanted

>>16081261
you can't just multiply the cost per kg by the weight of a person to find the cost of a ticket. there's not a chance in hell of fitting 200 tons of people in starship, even before all the life support and structural overheads to transport humans.

>>16081243
Our only hope for surviving the AI apocalypse is that the super intelligence is female and likes to suck dick

>>16081271
transatlantic_slaver_starship_blueprints.png

>>16081255
feasible and probable aren't the same thing

>>16081022
I'm now imagining a JWST-like telescope but instead of folding, it's assembled in orbit with the mirror segments being delivered from a Starship door.

>>16081154
I can believe it, it just necessarily won't be in one piece

There are 2 big problems that no one is talking about
1. Payload doors
This one is obvious, because instead of making one, universal type of Starship for cargo, they decided to make a Starlink dispenser type, which also encountered structural problems. First two Ships had their doors welded shut and next got a lot of reinforcement. This makes you think, how are they going to solve the issue of one huge payload door? Not even a single prototype for bigger payloads has been constructed yet.
2. Ship and Booster catching
It seems like a task that's barely possible, compared to "normal" landing. Barge or a pad are large enough to allow a margin of mistake and if you watch Starlink launches, there are still many cases when the Booster ends up off-center. Now, SH has an advantage of ability to hover, allowing for more precise landing but your fuel is very limited and your target is very small. It has to hover perfectly in place while chopsticks move quickly enough to attach themselves. What we have seen so far is that chopsticks are very slow and even a simple stacking can take 3 hours. One small mistake and it would be a farewell to arms.

>>16081291
>a farewell to arms
heh

>>16080641
They were only strapped in at the waist, their necks and backs broke immediately after depressurisation

>>16081291
1)having different cargo starships is not a big problem, they are going to be launching so many starlinks dedicated vehicles could make sense
they need to make a specialized moonship, propellant ship and depot anyway, a mars ship and probably one for deep space missions
so you have a bunch of special ships already
and launching their internal satellites while they iterate on the ship is so much easier than trying to negotiate some commercial payloads with a rocket that is still under rapid development

2) that is why you want to launch starlinks while you iterate
they are going to do water landings until they are very sure they can actually land on the chopsticks

>>16081295
*oops meant to say one crew member was strapped in at the waist

I wouldn't be surprised if we see boosters with landing legs coming down on droneships and pads, since getting the hang of the chopstick catch could take a while. There's plenty of mass budget to go around (send up 80 Starlinks instead of 100 if they have to), but booster production (or, more specifically, the Raptors going in to the booster) could well be the bottleneck on launches, and launch cadence is what determines how fast they can iterate and learn; they might as well get the booster back while they practice landings and then reuse it. This virtuous cycle (reliability and performance leading to reusability leading to higher cadence leading to more learning leading to better reliability and performance) is exactly what's made Falcon 9 into such a good rocket. The chopstick catch can be revived whenever they've got the hang of making precise enough landings - and, more importantly, the confidence that they're reliably precise enough not to destroy all the GSE.

>>16081291
1. structural issues arise with the pez door because it's very wide, basically the width of the ship. Shuttle style doors that aren't as wide but are much taller would likely be structurally stronger, but wouldn't have the width required to launch the big ass v2 starlinks
2. it will be a while before starship is launching with anything near its rated payload to LEO, so there should be a comfortable margin of fuel to hover for as long as required. The chopsticks basically don't move at all during the catch. That being said I wouldn't be surprised if they end up putting legs on one or both of ship/SH

>>16081301
I wonder how big would be the mass penalty from adding landing gear. Maybe it would be worth it to have landing legs in V1 Starship and when they master it, they could switch to catching in V2. That could be a waste of resources, but they would have achieved reusability much earlier.

>>16081092
someone tell them what happens to literally every other rocket except falcon 9

>>16081318
I would be, I don't think we have seen any leg hardware anywhere or the preparation of a droneship for a booster to land
I'm pretty sure super heavy is way too big for F9 droneships

>>16081320
HLS is going to need legs in any case

>>16081092
Can you believe there will be 18,000 of these on ebay soon?

>I browse twitter to get angry
Go outside

>>16081335
My bathroom could use some new tiles.

Yesterday I made a post about Space Pioneer's press release on their new Zhangjiagang facility, which is intended to produce 30 rockets and 500 engines per year.
http://www.spacepioneer.cc/news/detail/121

It was pointed out that it seems to have not many parking spaces for that production volume (depending on the availability of public transportation in Zhangjiagang). So I searched around a bit more to find out exactly how much of the value chain this facility is supposed to be responsible for. The press release mentioned testing and assembly. It also mentioned welding and machining (机加 abbreviation of 机械加工), and I got the impression that they machine parts and weld a lot of stuff together. But apparently pretty much the whole rocket is delivered from Tianjin to Zhangjiagang in a structurally almost complete state. Essentially, they've shifted final integration and testing from Tianjin to Zhangjiagang.

Sources
https://www.sohu.com/a/733587090_121448078
https://news.2500sz.com/doc/2024/02/26/1066291.shtml

Video of a visit at the Zhangjiagang facility. In the main assembly hall is pretty much an entire TL-2 rocket body, that he says was just recently unpacked. He then talks to a guy assembling a TL-3 first stage safety relief valve. Facility manager Tian Weifeng mentions that the TL-3 first launch this July is to be followed by two TL-3 launches for paying customers in September and November.
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1TQ4y1c73c

Other stuff I read:
* TL-3 is especially intended for megaconstellation deployment, and can carry 30+ satellites
* The intent is to reach a 30/year cadence within 3 years of TL-3 first launch (i.e. 2027), which seems pretty ambitious
* Although TL-3 will use the new universal pad in Hainan, a TL-3 pad is also being built at Jiuquan

>>16080794
Saint Energia...

https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/musks-spacex-is-building-spy-satellite-network-us-intelligence-agency-sources-2024-03-16/

>SpaceX is building a network of hundreds of spy satellites under a classified contract with a U.S. intelligence agency, five sources familiar with the program said, demonstrating deepening ties between billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk's space company and national security agencies.
>The network is being built by SpaceX's Starshield business unit under a $1.8 billion contract signed in 2021 with the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), an intelligence agency that manages spy satellites, the sources said.

>>16081198
It's probably trademarked or whatever, but I doubt anyone is going to get starship and a small plastic candy dispenser mixed up.
>>16081334
But HLS doesn't need any re-entry stuff like flaps or tiles so that's a load of saved mass.

>>16081367
Did some Starlink satellites got reclassified as Starshield? I know that the problem was with Ukies using them in suicide drones and it stopped for a while and then resumed.

>>16080437
Has cryogenic fuels been tried on aircraft before?
Could the SR-71 used them?

>>16081374
>cryogenic fuel on a plane that's supposed to cruise at Mach 3

>>16081369
I figured the owners of the PEZ trademark might want something for the use of their name, but they appear to be the original founder's family who owns majority stock and maybe they're cool enough to not be lawfair dicks about it.

>>16081367
https://archive.is/r6Y5p

>>16081369
SpaceX isn't using the term like a trademark. In >>16081180 it's the people who made the video that are using it. A trademark isn't a monopoly on a word.

>>16081367
>24/7/365 multi-spectrum view of the entire planet
bad for our enemies, worse for us. grimdark times ahead.

>>16081154
The same dude that said we would have cities on mars in 2020

>You can potentially send a few Starships offset by a few days. If the first one fails to land you look at the data, and remotely make software updates to the second.
the plan congeals

>>16081352
>The intent is to reach a 30/year cadence within 3 years of TL-3 first launch (i.e. 2027), which seems pretty ambitious
It's ambitious, but it's Elon's kind of ambitious.

One of the big issues that other companies in the west have with imitating SpaceX is that 2024 doesn't have the payload backlog that we did back in 2012. That's not an issue in China. Their current launch capacity shortfall might actually be worse than ours was. They also don't have to waste time evaluating questions like parachutes vs retropropulsion (just imitate Falcon 9's choices) and funding might be a bit easier to come by (everyone wants to invest in the next SpaceX). The biggest stumbling block I can see for them is other rockets like the Zhuque-2 that are trying to the same market space at the same time.

>>16081406
elon has put himself in a position where he can get away with saying whatever he wants and the only recourse people who can't do anything about it have is complaining that it doesn't come true.
yeah. we don't have martian cities right now. I can tell you today that the million people on mars in 2050 isn't happening. what are you gonna do about it?

>>16081406
he never said that

This guy is so annoying.
The 'spreadsheet warriors' here are people who called him out for not doing the basic maths on starship regarding deltaV and transfers.

He is someone uses their credentials as authority, in order back up very trite opinions on starship and Mars missions that have been argued about for decades as if it's god's holy truth.
I really wish someone like Zubrin would take him to task on this.

His overall point that Mars colonisation is a long shot is actually fine, but all of the reasons he provides are extremely dumb and incurious.

>>16081436
>This guy is so annoying.
I wouldn't know, I don't read twitter garbage.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1769040684579754078

>>16081377
Yes?
An aircraft that has a bunch of cryogenic fuel to dump heat into is a great idea.
This has been proposed many times for scramjets.

>>16081367
LEO mega constellations are the future of space militarization.
NRO + Space Development Agency is relentlessly moving ahead here with Starshield and missile tracking layers.
Anyone who isn’t aggressively building production facilities to churn out tens of thousands of LEO satellites and the rockets necessary to launch them (ideally reusable rockets), and developing civilian commercial use cases from telecommunications to ADAS to spread some of the costs, might as well by living in the 2010s still.
Anyone who isn't working on next gen counterspace (attacking satellites without causing a shit ton of debris - yes there is a way) is ngmi.

>>16081409
its so obvious yet I've never thought about it or seen discussion
doesn't help if there are physical design or engineering problems though
but SpaceX could just send a bunch of mars starships, like 10, and have them arrive every few days
or even a week apart to have more time to analyze the data, then iterate the landing within one launch window

>>16081436
See >>16081336

>>16081436
he's using his credentials as a springboard for his shitposts and trolling to farm engagement in order to get money from twitter blue

>>16081021
>one of the launch officers had to tell his insurance company a rocket fell on his car
This will always be funny to me.

>>16081427
he can't keep getting away with it

>>16081367
Do you think this is separate from the Space Force constellation or is it the same thing?

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/IF12045.pdf
>In 2017, the Air Force again proposed replacing the E-3 AWACS with a new program called the Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS). Following release of the 2018 National Defense Strategy, the Air Force reevaluated its requirements for ABMS. According to a 2020 Government Accountability Office report, the Air Force “concluded that no single platform, such as an aircraft, would be the right solution to providing command and control capabilities across multiple domains.” Air Force officials testified in April 2019 regarding a new vision for ABMS, which aims to provide a family of command and control systems in air, space, and cyberspace.

>The U.S. Space Force has disclosed that it intends to develop a low earth orbit satellite constellation to provide GMTI and AMTI capabilities in the future. The Air Force has also stated it intends to eventually transition airborne battle management aircraft to a space-based capability. It remains unclear when this space-based radar constellation would be operational.

>>16081092
>NNOOOO THE ENVRIONMENT
Death to all environmentalists. The only way to stop pollution is to kill all humans, untenable and pointless.
Reminder that environmentalism is a soviet plot created with the intention of destroying western industry by subversion from the inside. So far it's worked excellently for that goal.

>>16081463
They also encourange "Area 51 enthusiasts" to take photos inside classified airstrips and facilities.
The Cold War never ended.

So from what I gather, Starship survived peak heating with its bare ass pointed the wrong way and only broke up due to prolonged melting/erosion. Those tiles are probably more than enough, could even lose some I bet

>>16081466
I'm still not sure when and if Starship broke up at all, I presume it did for obvious reasons but did anybody get a good look at it after signal loss? Any views of the reentry showing it break apart? I wonder how much disintegrated, if it blew apart there would probably be a lot of steel that made it down to the sea. Maybe it stayed in a couple big pieces, or one even?

>>16081455
Last week someone had to tell his insurance company that a plane wheel fell on his car.

>>16081404
What is gridmark? Also this is a schizo nightmare come true.

>>16081473
IFT-2 stayed in some pretty big chunks, though reentered at lower velocity

>>16081436
I'd tell you to get off twitter, but what I really want you to do is go back.

>>16081367
>Roughly a dozen prototypes have been launched since 2020, among other satellites on SpaceX's Falcon 9 rockets, three of the sources said.
>A U.S. government database of objects in orbit shows several SpaceX missions having deployed satellites that neither the company nor the government have ever acknowledged. Two sources confirmed those to be prototypes for the Starshield network.
lol

https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/musks-spacex-is-building-spy-satellite-network-us-intelligence-agency-sources-2024-03-16/
Is this all Starship and Starlink were about? A massive glownıgger spy network?
So no Mars BS?

>>16081497

>>16081497

>>16081499
It was obvious military would want to be part of it and why would spacex say no to free money?

>>16081499
How is this a scoop? Does reuters not know what Starshield is

>>16081499
no that is not what starship and starlink were about, that is just an obvious military application of starlink tech (cheap LEO satellite megaconstellation)
putting some sensors on the sats is obvious

>>16081499
also see >>16081367
and archive link >>16081380

>>16081501
Payload deployed, mission success

>>16081512
partial failure, not in target orbit

>>16081221
Stabilized version
https://twitter.com/ophello/status/1768481359209849070?t=u9hd-jMa-pv47GCVD-xH-g

>>16081291
Wooden payload doors on a spaceship?!
They can't expect us to believe this.

>>16081501
>>16081514
kek

>>16081492
>A U.S. government database of objects in orbit shows several SpaceX missions having deployed satellites that neither the company nor the government have ever acknowledged. Two sources confirmed those to be prototypes for the Starshield network.
God I love spooksat deployments, makes our enemies worry and the autistic satellite catalog trackers seethe

>>16081291
you're right
doors are very new technology
archaeologists have determined that the first doors were invented near the end of 1997
it's pretty cutting edge stuff that's never been done before
maybe with a few thousand years of experience with "door" technology they'll be able to put some fucking hinges on a piece of metal in the year 5000 or so

>>16081526
Are we sure they are not being deployed all the time already together with starlinks?

kek
https://twitter.com/francescospace_/status/1768303295716630773

>>16081532
>tonight on /sfg/ handwaves: will starship's payload bay door just be some hardware store hinges bolted to a sheet of metal?
>but first: we cover how the shuttle engineers were overpaid for making a payload fairing that closes autonomously and survives reentry

>>16081509
>an obvious military application of starlink
Looks like a mostly military program where the civilian internet from space application is just a façade.

>>16081448
If the NRO pivoted from big GEO assets to networks of many LEO assets then ULA is done for. Their entire business is big defense birds.

>>16081526
Should have named it KosmosXYZ

>>16081541
the military constellation is going to be smaller and probably bring in much less revenue overall, so no its not a facade

>>16081541
>If the NRO pivoted from big GEO assets to networks of many LEO assets then ULA is done for. Their entire business is big defense birds
Doesn't make much sense. You want high resolution. Why would it matter that the satellites are networked?

>>16081179
That one is meant to ignite in flight. Note the bigger nozzle.

it's now legal to say kek on /sfg/
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1768809451253825566

>>16081539
the engines and untiled side of the ship has to survive, too
feel free to wet your pants about it, but it's not going to be a big deal

>near future
>SpaceX launches routine Starlink launch
>planet4589 begrudgingly notes down USA 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, etc...

kek

>>16081554
RIGHT WING DOG WHISTLE

>>16081539
Payload door surviving reentry shouldn't be a problem, it's the ship surviving during the flight because of the huge door.

>>16081554
cringe

>>16081554
thats based

>>16081562
I can hear it

>>16081548
for real-time data feeds without the need for ground stations everywhere (so laserlinks), redundancy through a bunch of satellites (helped by laserlinks too, if one gets shot down you can reroute the data) and the closer the satellites are the more granular data you get for the same resolution sensors, be that cameras or whatever
the only reason to continue having GEO sats in this case would be dissimilar redundancy

kek is just ironic lol for retards

>>16081175
Lofstrom loop is better. Only costs about $100 billion startup costs and world agreement that the pacific ocean is a giant launching area

>>16081608
lul

>>16081612
there is a 0% chance you could build that thing for 100 billion

>>16081608
kek

>>16081612
you can fit a 2.5g launch loop across south america IIRC, but of course that requires floating it over a literal jungle

I miss wew

>>16081608
lel

>>16081616
me, when my boss asks me to estimate the cost, timeline, risks and difficulty of a project:
>>16081612

>>16081616
guy who dreamed it up claimed 20 billion some years ago. Im just eyeballing for inflation

There's no fancy materials in this thing. It's just a giant magnetic baring in space, which maglev trains use for propulsion via eddycurrent breaking. It's all old tech.

Only stumbling block is nobody needs to get that much stuff to space that badly. But the same tech can be used for excellent power storage. Go find his website to get an idea.

>>16081622
>>16081621
>>16081617
>>16081614
>>16081608

>>16081619
if you plop it in the ocean it's probably easier for logicstics to handle, if it explodes it won't fall on anyone's heads, and when you need to turn it off for maintenance you can gently lower it to the sea and allow it to float.

Go read his paper. Ill make a QRD shortly.

>>16081612
>>16081628
QRD 1/2:
its not a coil or railgun, but somewhat similar. It's linked to somewhere on the server sky website.
It's an active structure, basically a mag-lev train but the train accelerates using eddy current drag by interacting with a hypervelocity iron cable (rotor), confined in a similar way to magnetic bearings.

Every element of such a structure can be made with current technology and materials, and has no requirement for exotic things like superconductors.

The track is constituted of: a casing to provide a vacuum; magnetic coils to levitated and confine the hypervelocity iron rotor; optical sensors to detect the rotor position, and adjust magnetic field strengths to keep it in the right place. This encases the iron rotor that passes through the tube at several km/second.

The track is suspended by the force generated by the rotor as a result of deflecting it's path. Because the rotor is travelling above orbital speed, it wants to fly into space, by using the track to confine it, the track feels a pushing force towards space, against gravity.
To stop the track flying into space as the rotor wants to push it, the track is held down with guy wires, anchored to the earth.

By adjusting the speed of the rotor and the path the track takes, the forces in the system can be kept within tolerances allowed by modern materials easily.

The track goes up in a rough arc shape, rising to about 80km, where it levels off for several thousand kilometres, travelling at a constant 80km from the surface.

On the ground at each end of the arc, the track loops around to allow the rotor inside to constantly circulate. At such vast scales, normally inflexible-at-human-scale iron bends easily. Base stations use additional magnetic fields to constantly keep the iron rotor up to speed, adding energy to it.

>>16081612
>>16081630
QRD 2/2:

To actually accelerate things up to orbit, shuttles/trains are used. At first they are stationary relative to the surface of earth, in order to levitate without being in contact with the track, they, like the rest of the track, interact magnetically with the iron rotor inside, resting their weight on it via magnetically deflecting it slightly downwards.
In order to start accelerating, all the shuttles need to do is apply a magnetic field in a direction such that eddy current drag is created in the same direction of the iron rotor.

Usefully, the acceleration the shuttles can be subjected to entirely depends on how eddy current drag force you make. This means gentle, 1-2G accelerations are feasible, letting squishy humans get to space without harm or training. As the shuttle is accelerated from a ground speed of 0km/s to orbital velocity, the force required to levitate them diminishes. Once at orbital speed, they disconnect from the track and climb into space, requiring a small fraction of total mass as maneuvering fuel.

In Keith Lofstrom’s paper (also on his site), he posits that the cost of building such a structure would be around 20 billion dollars. That was some time ago, so lets say about $100 billion today. I’m unsure of how accurate those costs are, but the far greater challenges are the space requirements for such a megastructure, it needs to be built in the ocean. Good luck getting politics sorted for that!

I think that’s it. Pretty cool in my opinion.

>>16081201
>tethers don't require magic materials

>>16081612 >>16081616 >>16081619 >>16081623 >>16081630 >>16081632
180 IQ rocket engineer says we are light years away from these megastructures

>>16081628
there's nobody anybody cares about in the amazon jungle in the north of brazil

>>16081634
They don't if you make it an active structure. E.g. float a magnetic bearing off the centripetal force made by deflecting a hypervelocity rotor off it's ballistic path, like in the loffstrom loop. Think keeping a tennis ball in the air by spraying water at it from a hose. You can make structures vastly bigger than possible with material strengths.

>>16081635
That's mostly a product of no dire need to launch hundreds of kilotonnes into space, and govt regulations arguing over who owns the sea. So basically the same issues spaceflight has always had, nobody needs it.

>>16081648
also its susceptibility to bad actors (see Nord Stream 2)
imagine building that thing and then... boom

>>16081634
I guess it depends what you mean with a tether
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyhook_(structure)

>>16081638
Communists don't care, but will use the opportunity to sabotage mankind by complaining that brown people or tree frogs will be squashed.

>>16081635
space elevator and space tethers are not the same at all

>>16081651
nahhh it'll be fine...
In any case, this arguement can (and will, until governments cease to exist) be used to justify ever increasing regulations on people as technology advances in capability. E.g. "you can't have guns because 1 man could kill many".

Pretty sure the atmosphere would take it out if it failed, also an advantage of being in the ocean; if a normal failure occurs, you can dump the rotor into the ocean for an earthshattering kaboom.
This is all deteailed on lofstroms site i think.

>>16081624
you should see how much gerrard oneill thought his space colonies were going to cost

>>16081548
What matters is that there are too many of them to be taken down at once with the current antisat systems.

>>16081194
I wouldn't be in such a situation in the first place, but
>I don't have one, but neither do you. And even if you did have a PhD in rocket science, I would still be more willing to trust a company that is consistently setting new launch records every year and actively advancing the field rather than a guy who makes debunking videos on YouTube. Actions speak louder than words.

>>16081666
guess it's all a matter of supply and demand at the end of the day. Nobody really needs to get more than a few hundred tonnes in to space at most. Lofstrom loop gets 100kT's

>>16081672
A fleet of reusable Starships that have a cadence of launching everyday gets 100kT's as well
you just need to scale the number of launch towers and sites, and build Starship factories
seems way more feasible and easier to scale than one massive structure that is just 0 or 1

Lmao theyre selling the hotstage separate fuuuck maybe i'll use my xmas bonus on all 3

>>16081677
once starship and starship class competitors are in full swing, we're running out of places to build spaceports, and people still want more shit flung to orbit. that's when building these things starts to make sense

?

>>16081680
>buying this when we know for a fact that starship design will change soonish

I live in a London apartment, will Starlink work for me? I don't have a balcony but I think I can mount it outside my window. It's not 360 degrees unobstructed view of the sky though

Flight 4 in June or July?

>>16080291
Aerojet-Shekeldyne has ~20 left I think. Lmao should mail em to Pivdenmash.

>>16081698
use the starlink app to test your location dummy

>>16081700
They want to do 9 launches this year but realistically 4 so probably June.

>>16081688
Gay. I’d buy a Wernher von Braun BLVD SeX sign or something, but not this reddit-tier shit

>>16081688

9 SRB Vulcan.

>>16081700
4th of July

>>16081700
optimistically june pessimistically july

>>16081700
May.

>>16081700
July 4th. Booster will be getting a special livery.

>>16081701
There was some talk about shipping the AJ-26s back to Russia, but that was around 2016 and I don't think anything came of it

Really hope they bring the Bomber Jacket back. I missed an opportunity to buy one when I had the chance. Anyone here have one, how is the quality?

>>16081291
Chopsticks won't move vertically during catching. They open and close plenty fast enough to deal with catching a hovering ship or booster. The thing that's actually an issue is going to be getting the flip precise enough to not smack into the tower or leave it too far away to the point that it runs out of fuel while hovering before it can reposition. However I don't think a Starship smacking into the tower would actually do that much damage. It would certainly cause some damage and require repairs, but it's nothing compared to Raptor exhaust or a fully fueled stack exploding right next to it. Remember that SN9 fell against the walls of the bay and the bay was fine. The tower is a hell of a lot tougher than the bays are. I don't think catching the booster will prove to be much of a challenge though. Its profile is something they already have much more experience with, in that it just comes straight down while thrusting, and it has greater ability to hover than Starship.
The payload bay doors I do think are the biggest understated problem though.

>>16081719
July 4th will be the 3th launch of this year

>>16081726
*3rd

>>16081727
3nd

>>16081166
yes, the signal's frequency would have to be shifted during transmission to simulate the "correct" doppler shift and as far as the actual movement of your transmitting probe it would have to counter the telltale movement of a sun-orbiting probe and have to simulate being "static" against the background stars from Earth's vantage point

>>16081475
Basically "everything is awful and it's never going to get better."

>>16081612
>covered from end to end in sophisticated electronics
>unsolved stability issues
>always a microsecond away from releasing a megaton-scale explosion if its rotor collides with the sheath
sounds great!

how are russia/china/iran/nk/etc. supposed to fight against an america backed by starshield and starship?

>>16081698
>I live in a London apartment, will Starlink work for me?
Sorry, I don't speak urdu

>>16081747
by facing the sky and waiting for impact

>>16081747
Detonating nuke in space

>>16081747
as is the case with every weapon system the us fields, they aren't. that's why we have them

>>16081747
You don't.

>>16081747
They just need to convince the US business community to lobby on their behalf. Greyzone stuff.
Kinetically I agree, no chance. The capabilities im seeing being rolled out is just too isane

>>16081747
China can counter starlink by building an antisat laser system. Starlinks aren't especially big or well-armored, so the laser equivalent of a high power rifle round should be able to mission kill one. Then the PLA can just plink them as they pass over inner mongolia while telling Washington that it's a bad idea to allow Taiwan to use Starlink during the ongoing hostilities. Starship does good payload numbers in theory, but China's own reuseables are coming online soon so I don't think that gap is as big as people think.

Russia can counter Starlink by lighting off a few nukes in low orbit and frying everyone's satellites, with the only downside being that gives a free casus belli to everyone with LEO infrastructure and another one for being the one to break the nuclear taboo. Russia can't keep up with America in mass to orbit in any scenario, but they also don't have nearly as much military or economic reliance on orbital assets so it's not that big an issue.

Iran can get space fucked, but that's about par for middle eastern players. Us fucking with them via space assets will just lead to them fucking with us by funding jihadis somewhere else.

https://twitter.com/Pockn_CG/status/1769057806022492396

Ass down its time to reenter

>>16080580
>girl
based and heteronormative pilled

>>16081777
Yay finally someone made it. Nice. I knew the cameras were on the moving flaps, but I still found it hard to orient myself. This makes it pretty straightforward

>>16081374
>Could the SR-71 used them?
No. The SR-71 had custom fuel designed specifically for it, called JP-7. It also had no fuel tank, the fuel would be loaded into the cavity of the body of the plane. The SR-71 also leaked fuel on the runway because the body panels had gaps between them. When flying at Mach 3, the panels heated up and expanded to fit snug while in flight.
The fuel was also used as a way to cool the cockpit, it was circulated around the cabin to draw off the heat from the high speeds. Going cryogenic would destroy the plane and kill the pilots.

>>16080544

>>16081374
>>16081782
not my design
NASA's

>>16081793

>>16081747
by threatening with nukes
surveillance isn't going to remove the threat of spamming nukes, you would need some kind of anti-missile platform on the sats and starshield isn't that (yet)

>>16081776
Would the Polyus laser fit inside a modified Angara/Proton or is it too big?

>>16081799
wait no its 88t

>>16081799
You could miniaturize stuff a lot more now. And you may not need the entire servicing compartment it had, too.

>>16081806
You might be able to launch it in two parts like Zenith Star when Washington was trying to launch that on the Titan IV, but Polyus is big enough that even that would need something like the Angara A5V. That said, Polyus was intended as an anti-ballistic missile laser and that would have a lot higher power requirements that an antisatellite weapon. The Angara A5M is supposed to lift 27 tons and you could probably fit a smaller version of the system into that mass budget.

>>16081777
lmao no control authority at all

>>16081824
Yes everyone has been telling you the RCS failed during the coast phase.

all this talk of lasers and nukes are depressing... can't we all just get along with each other?

>>16081830
All of human history says no.

>>16081698
no

>>16081367
based

>>16081114
>Czech Academy of Sciences
lmao

>>16081830
yes but we need to genocide Russians first

>>16081010
Post any pepe image, and you'll quickly get a reply that says "stupid frogposter"

>>16081850
Those academies are legit - national labs of the US basically (Fermilab, Sandia, LANL etc)