/sci/ - Science & Math

Again, this is the previous OP and I didnt make this thread so dont complain about ME not listening to previous criticism. Good night Metropolis.

One day we'll have kino like this again

Dyson Spheres do not exist. Stop looking.

>>16184158
>t. Dyson Sphere haver

>Combine symbol is a dyson sphere under construction

>>16184158
Kardashev robot claws typed this post

Dont forget your ancestors

https://x.com/CNSpaceflight/status/1792412326030868980

>>16184170

>>16184169
Fuck you monkeydonian subhumans

>>16184171

>>16184170
Precision guided hypergolic village annihilator

>>16184174

May I know the approximate date of the next Starship test flight?

>>16184208
>Welcome... to Jurassic Park

>>16184208
two weeks

>>16184219
I swear I'm gonna spit in the next burger I Assemble if I hear that one more time.

15refuellingflight truthers have been redeemed. What a good day to be alive.

>>16184228
its true, end of may or start of june is launch
so two weeks

>>16184231
Which things have to happen before they are actually ready to launch?

>>16184229
starship refueling will never work and if it did then it's thanks to nasa, not elon

>>16184237
explain your reasoning

>>16184228
Two more burger assemblies

>>16184242
im going to sleep

>>16184242
Elon Derangement Syndrome

>>16184146
Thank you, thank you, folks. Great to see you all here today. You know, I was thinkin' the other day about the time I had the, uh, unique honor of bein' an astronaut. Yeah, that's right, an astronaut. And, uh, it was during the Apollo 11 mission. I was there with Neil Armstrong. Now, let me tell ya, Neil was one heck of a guy.

So there we were, standin' on the moon. Neil, he steps down and says, That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind. And you know what? Right after that, I leaned over and said, Neil, you forgot your helmet back on the module. Can you imagine? Forgot his helmet. We had a good laugh about it, but it just goes to show, even in the biggest moments, it's the little things that matter.

This kinda reminds me of a time back in Scranton. There was this old bakery on the corner, best apple pie you ever had. My mom used to take me there every Saturday. We'd sit and have a slice, talk about life. She'd say, Joey, always remember to savor the sweet moments. And I'd say, Mom, you’re absolutely right.

But, uh, back to the moon landing. We were lookin' out at the Earth, and I thought, my goodness, what a sight. And I remembered what my dad used to say, Joey, always aim for the stars, even if you miss, you'll land among the moon rocks. Or, uh, somethin' like that. It's about keepin' your eyes on the prize, folks.

And, uh, there was this one time, I was talkin' with Buzz Aldrin. Great guy, by the way. And he said, Joe, you ever think about how small we are in the grand scheme of things? And I said, Buzz, we may be small, but our dreams are big. It's about perspective, folks.

So here I am today, ready to serve you, just like I served on that historic mission. Ready to listen, ready to work hard, and ready to help us all reach for the stars together. Because together, we can achieve great things.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.

>>16184170
looks like grid fins on SECOND stage to me

>>16184236
IIRC
> A WDR (That's supposed to be today)
>Destack
>Fix the tiles on the heatshield
>Check the electrics for potential faults
>Attach FTS
>Restack
>FAA License

Asstroonomers (totally not backed by BlueLA, democrats, satellite companies, or foreign powers) latest logic on why Starlink should be illegal: it could block us from seeing killer asteroids headed our way
https://english.elpais.com/technology/2024-05-18/spacex-satellites-threaten-to-hide-asteroids-that-pose-danger-to-humanity.html

I want to get into model rocketry, and I'm looking for inspiration. I want to build real rockets however none of them use fins. What are rockets that have fins. Proper orbital rockets, none of that sounding missile crap.

Pic related. Also why is it if I proompt anything about model rockets it always puts kids in. What did it mean by this?

>>16184312
>Pic related. Also why is it if I proompt anything about model rockets it always puts kids in. What did it mean by this?
It means you're a stupid autistic manchild anon.

>>16184312
>I want to build real rockets however none of them use fins. What are rockets that have fins. Proper orbital rockets, none of that sounding missile crap
???????

>>16184312
model rocketry is for children. Get real if you want to do it. Make the first hobbyist orbital class rocket. Most of the components can be purchased off the shelf and the rocket can be tiny if it doesn't need a useful payload. Once you build it yourself it could become something you can build many times and sell. The one problem is dealing with givernments getting mad if you put things in orbit without their permission.

>>16184268
they clearly are, and this is no new development. China was using gridfins for second stage stabilization since before Falcon 9 ever adopted them. Retarded Twitter post as usual.

>>16184319
dinky ass fins. You will never be an airfoil

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_fIEFixUBw

WDR happening

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lU5De6wEdfQ

>>16184302
Why don't they just put the telescopes in space where they belong. Also crazy high effort page for some gay seething fud, definitely paid for by some glowing fuckhead.

Have we seen any Raptor 3’s at Starbase?

>We proposed a new class of planetary missions dubbed ‘gliding entry’, to distinguish them from the direct entry missions conducted or planned at that time. Waverider could be used for prolonged exploration of the upper layers of Earth’s atmosphere, so far sampled only by vertical sounding rockets; but it could map the ionosphere of Jupiter (Fig. 4), which is multi-layered and deep, whereas the Galileo entry probe went through it in seconds. Because the most intense plasma would be concentrated below Waverider during atmosphere entry, it should be possible to maintain contact from overhead, or from Earth in a planetary mission, through the entry phase. For extended missions in the atmospheres of Venus, Jupiter and Titan, balloons are at the mercy of the winds, limiting the study to one airstream, unless reaching another by rising or falling; their usefulness for surface studies is limited. When deployed over Venus in 1986, their lifetimes were short; Waveriders could cut across airstreams for more comprehensive sampling, and at low speed, would remain aloft almost indefinitely in denser atmosphere layers.
> Waverider’s low wing-loading gives a landing ‘footprint’, descending from space, which literally envelops the Earth, and touchdown speed less than 160 kph; a delivery vehicle which can land anywhere on Earth, on ordinary runways, will have great political importance.
https://theorkneynews.scot/2022/11/27/waverider-part-1-a-spacecraft-in-waiting/

>>16184361
I'm not sure Raptor 3 really exists yet

https://idlewords.com/2024/5/the_lunacy_of_artemis.htm

Good blogpost on how insane Artemis is.

>>16184312
What shitass model are you using.

>>16184379
>idleworlds.com

>>16184379
>wall of text seething about Starship
tl;dr

>>16184379
>The real problem with Artemis is that it doesn’t think through the consequences of its own success.
>A working infrastructure for orbital refueling would make SLS and Orion superfluous.
Uh oh

>>16184379
Guys, I'm worried. He's making some sense. What if Mars is a big mistake?

>>16184403
what a faggot

>>16184403
Well he's right. "current technology" does not include propellant depots, a crewed starship, or ISRU on a large scale. They're not unsolvable though

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1792536841725661392

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1792540090264379863

>>16184455
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/05/we-take-a-stab-at-decoding-spacexs-ever-changing-plans-for-starship-in-florida/

>>16184455
what is Staeship? Is Musk hiding a new prototype?

>>16184462
That implies he typed on a physical keyboard, no autocorrect. Highly unusual.

>>16184336
2 weeks?

>>16184467
Concerning.

>>16184363

Why did they design Orion to be this goofy? back as a kid checking out constellation shit I always though the service module was too miniscule to be useful. Who in their right mind actually designed this without having the devious motiveto make the missions more Rube-Godberg style purpose

>>16184467
I've turned autocorrect off on my phone

>>16184476
* on purpose

>>16184379
this shit is hilarious!
>NASA likes to boast that Orion can stay in space far longer than Apollo, but this is like bragging that you’re in the best shape of your life after the bank repossessed your car.

>>16184208
Imagine turning all of Venus into this

>>16184379
>For the first time since the early 1960's, it's unclear whether the US space agency is even capable of putting astronauts on the moon.
What world is this guy living in? Does he think that the Space Shuttle could've put astronauts on the moon? The constellation program?
>SLS looks like someone started building a Space Shuttle and ran out of legos for the orbiter.
kek, that's good. I actually agree with a lot of what he says about the SLS, especially on the shitty ICPS.
>Early on, SLS designers made the catastrophic decision to reuse Shuttle hardware, which is like using Fabergé eggs to save money on an omelette.
Yeah, he's very carefully avoiding the fact that congress is to blame for this, I wonder why?
>But to search for technical grounds is to misunderstand the purpose of Gateway. The station is not being built to shelter astronauts in the harsh environment of space, but to protect Artemis in the harsh environment of Congress.
well put, he's pretty spot on with gateway and NRHO.
>HLS looks more likely to tip over than the last two spacecraft to land on the moon, which tipped over.
The budgets of those two previous programs are a world apart from starship's.
>The crew are left suspended so high above the surface that they need a folding space elevator (not the cool kind) to get down.
A ladder could have been used, but it would've made the volume and mass that starship is capable of delivering to the moon pretty redundant. Also, what kind of folding space elevator isn't cool?
>And yet in the end this single-use lander carries less payload (both up and down) than the tiny Lunar Module on Apollo 17.
didn't know that, and he lists his source for the payload as "his own speculative guess", so I think it might actually be just bullshit.

>>16184471
!

>>16184489
cont.
>Given this fact, it’s remarkable that NASA’s contract with SpaceX doesn’t require them to demonstrate a lunar takeoff.
In another footnote, he reveals that SpaceX has voluntarily decided to demo ascent, so he's just being deceptive here.
> Why land a rocket the size of a building packed with moving parts?
Because it was all NASA could afford, every other option was too expensive. I think author-kun knows this, but has simply decided not to tell his readers.
I concede a lot of the other points he makes about starship & BO, they're fair.
>The upshot is that NASA has put a pair of last-minute long-shot technology development programs between itself and the moon.
Cannot dispute that.
Overall it's a pretty good article, I think his point is that artemis is a lost cause and should just be cancelled (presumably so they can start over with yet another rocket design).

>>16184489
>Also, what kind of folding space elevator isn't cool?
He's the kind of 20th-century space fan who is all for space elevators and regards rockets as a waste of time.

>>16184368
Naming is arbitrary and a marketing ploy. Raptor 2 works just as well as Raptor 1(it doesn't)

>>16184489
>And yet in the end this single-use lander carries less payload (both up and down) than the tiny Lunar Module on Apollo 17.
It's probably true. Getting fromand to NRHO has a much higher delta v tax than what the LEM had to do, and Starship will get to the Moon only partially fuelled. Notto mention that at present Starship can do under a third of it's promised performance to LEO

>>16184403
I can't be the only one who gets reminded of the movie dune after seeing this sinkhole on Mars.

>>16184455
>can't be bothered to correct typo even though he knows millions of people will read his tweet
What do we make of this bros?

>>16184455
which tower did they dis-assemble?

>>16184478
Are we just gonna ignore the fact that autocorrect is fucking useless and is forced on us by people like Elon Musk so we can feed their AI networks?

>>16184497
It won't have to get to NRHO because their won't be a Gateway

What the FUCK happened to Chris Gebhardt?

>>16184497
I'm doubtful it has less payload down, and even if it does, the additional internal volume for crew quarters/airlocks/decks should be counted as useful payload. Payload up doesn't matter because you're limited by what you can carry back onto orion

>In another footnote, he reveals that SpaceX has voluntarily decided to demo ascent, so he's just being deceptive here.
it's a failure of nasa's contracting to not stipulate that the ascent MUST be tested. Every other stage of HLS/commercial crew has had to be demonstrated in a demo mission, it's crazy that it wasn't for this when the potential launch conditions are totally novel

>>16184512
secured the bag. he's banging primo whores in Tahiti as we speak

>>16184493
>Overall it's a pretty good article, I think his point is that artemis is a lost cause and should just be cancelled (presumably so they can start over with yet another rocket design).
The question is whether the present-day US is institutionally capable of having a non-insane manned space program, or if something like Artemis that's difficult to cancel and full of pork is the best that can be done. No guarantee the next go around on this carousel would go any better, and could conceivably be worse. And I don't know how you change this situation, because there's a repeated pattern in the US of cancelling good programs for stupid reasons in spaceflight and beyond (not as bad as the UK though lol), and Congressional corruption is a problem everyone knows about but can't fix.

>>16184505
they dissembled the pad at the cape, but the tower is still there as far as I know
they also demolished a suborbital pad at starbase

>>16184458
>NASA and SpaceX already completed an environmental assessment in 2019 for launching Starship from LC-39A. Since then, the full-scale Super Heavy booster and Starship rocket have launched three times from SpaceX's Starbase facility located at Boca Chica Beach, Texas, just north of the US-Mexico border. A fourth test flight could happen at the end of May or early next month.
>With Starship now flying, SpaceX has a better handle on how it will operate the rocket in Florida. In its notice announcing the pending environmental review, the FAA said SpaceX's concept of operations has "evolved" since 2019. Rather than the previous estimate of 24 Starship launches per year at LC-39A, SpaceX now projects a higher tempo of up to 44 flights per year. SpaceX also proposes launching a more powerful version of the Super Heavy booster and Starship, with up to 35 engines on the first stage and up to nine engines on the upper stage, up from 31 and six.

Ya'll think this would be nice and good quality? Will I ever get pussy again if I hang this on my living room wall?

https://astrography.com/products/apollo-flight-plan-redesigned?variant=47178407936324

>>16184549
looks like a d

>>16184539
>SpaceX also proposes launching a more powerful version of the Super Heavy booster and Starship
A super...duper heavy?

>>16184322
>Make the first hobbyist orbital class rocket. Most of the components can be purchased off the shelf and the rocket can be tiny if it doesn't need a useful payload
Really dawg? Are you one of those people who says bo/virgin has made a sounding rocket so how hard can orbit be? Do you have any idea what the mass fractions are like on amateur rockets, even with no payload?

>>16184549
Why would this cool poster prevent you from "getting pussy" so to speak?

>>16184573
it's incredibly nerdy, and unless the chick is into stuff like this, I'm afraid it might give women "the ick" once they see it. I'm planning on getting a big version, not some small poster.

2024... I am forgotten...

>>16184576
Send a Red Dragon full of supplies and land it, keep monitoring the internal cams over the next two years to get a good idea of how your supplies react to being left on the surface longterm. This information will help inform upcoming missions and colonization efforts.

>>16184574
I have numerous diagrams saved on my computer. For example this somewhat inaccurate diagram of parameters in a gas turbine engine.

hey gyys hows it goin today

>>16184576
The fact that NASA didn't fund it is a proof that space exploration is not their priority.

>>16184549
which SpaceX merchandise do you recommend?

>>16184595
Just shit my pants, elon BTFO!!

Late may is still on the table

>>16184559
Starship Megaheavy

>>16184559
>>16184620
Super Duper Super Heavy

>>16184602
But Elon told us hes gonna spend his own money to make consciousness multiplanetary

>NASA finishes up mission
>NASA wants to continue existing
>build space station that has to be crewed 24/7
>now has to have a minimum funding or else space station falls apart
>Examples: ISS, Artemis Gateway
Now if only they could extend this logic to a surface base

>>16184643
Or just any extraterran base.

>>16184639
kek true, yet people only blame NASA. Elon promised Falcon heavy launches to mMars every launchwindow, yet there have been NONE

>>16184476
NASA did not want to pay for service module so they bartered a modified ATV service module for a seat in Orion

>>16184639
He started SpaceX out of his own money.
>>16184649
What kind of people? Outside of /sfg/ or some spaceflight communities NASA is rarely criticized. I'd say it's rather worshipped.

>Elon launches his manned Mars flotilla
>a flare like last weeks one happens
>everyone on board dies

>>16184651
space twitter is mostly Elon worship.

>>16184650
2 billion Euros + tax
t. Airbus/ESA

So thats WDR done. All thats left is get the FTS and loicense

>>16184654
>space twitter
So, mostly retards

>>16184659
and dont forget to subscribe, and become a channel member for exclusive benefits and streams, as well as buy and support us with more NSF merch and patches ;)
your support lets us stream more great Boca Chica footage!

>>16184653
space weather is a nothingburger

>>16184661
Obsessed + just watch the 24/7 stream for no commentary ever.

>Artemis III will never fly
>NASA will get weighed down in cost overruns, failures and setbacks, and other too-big-to-fail issues
>Superheavy MK1 can lift a three-stage apollo style moon mission now, but never will because MUH CONTRACTORS!
>China will beat them to boots on the moon.

inb4 "Shutup Chang", just a realistic American here.

Now that MSR money has been freed up we have more funds for Artemis

>>16184665
Starship is the weak link with artemis lol
spaceX is 4 years behind schedule while NASA waits for them to figure out how to do in orbit refueling, and god knows how long it will take them to build and test a human rates starship/lander
(lol 10 launches for a single vehicle to go to the moon)

>>16184559
We just gradually coming back to ITS kino
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qo78R_yYFA

>>16184620
is this what they are building??

>>16184667
>Starship is the weak link with artemis lol

And yet it will still be ready sooner than the other options while providing a greater potential in the long run.

>>16184620
How would reusable launch pad look for something like this

>>16184559
Probably 18m Starship
This version will actually be able to take 100 people to Mars, unlike Starship.

>>16184671
it took spaceX 10 years to develop and human rate crewed dragon from start of funding to demo-2, how long will starship take?

>>16184620
how much bigger can you go?

>>16184674
Starship is just a lander in this case, it does not need escape system and all other memes that NASA requires

>>16184673
Truth spoken. Thunderf00t was right about Starships actual specs, hats off to him. Guess we will have to wait a decade for them to dev the 18m version. Present version will be a good Starlink workhorse and Artemis will not land on the Moon

>>16184677
true... I guess spaceX is developing something closer to a skylab that can land on the moon for HLS, which nobody has done before

>>16184662
>space weather is a nothing-ACK!

>>16184665
Literally the only reason Artemis III wont happen is because of lunar starship. And China will do it because they choose a logic plan with only 2 launches and a real lunar lander instead of a fucking building

>>16184620
>>16184623

>>16184683
why are you such a homosexual

>>16184682
SLS/Orion is half to blame because they stick it in a retarded orbit due to not having the performance to get to a useful orbit. A more traditional lander like the dynetics proposal was impossible to make work due to the insane delta v requirements

>>16184674
>10yrs from scratch
>There will be absolutely zero transfer of knowledge between teams

>>16184684
vaginas are gross.

>>16184683
Atmospheric annihilator

>>16184689
based. I'm not gay either but vaginas are weird and confusing. Penises are aesthetic and beautiful, and they make sense, like a rocket.

I wonder how deluge/trench will look for new towers

>>16184692
picrel will help you understand vaginas

>>16184694
Theyre not doing deluge or trench for the new tower you fucking mongrel theres no god damn space for it and the plate works great. They only did it for Masseys.

>>16184681
>dude space weather would totally have killed these astronauts
unsubstantiated, overblown, wrong

Kek

>>16184698
1-2 Gray is 100-200 rads, someone is getting cancer during the mission

Can we please discuss the best way for a probe to reach Europa's ocean, which is below 20 kilometers of ice. The obvious method would be for the probe to melt through the ice using a nuclear power source, but are there other means? Also how would a submarine in Europa's ocean communicate with the surface?

>>16184695
"sounding" rocket

>>16184702
nukes

>>16184702
Lander drops a sphere of tungsten with a nuclear power source. The outside gets really got and it melts through the ice, trailing behind it a cable to communicate to the lander. Once it melts through the ice, it opens up and there's a probe inside which floats around (still connected to the cable) and takes pictures..

>>16184674
>it took spaceX 10 years to develop and human rate crewed dragon from start of funding to demo-2

Boeing and SpaceX won their commercial crew contracts in 2014.

SpaceX first flew humans six years later in 2020.

Boeing has yet to fly humans to space with theirs despite being the 'industry leader' and having requested half again as much money.

>>16184665
Unfortunate, but necessary. The humiliation of the Chinese beating us (back) to the moon should be the #1 issue of the 2032 election cycle.

>>16184701
first black astronaut, amazing. we have a new one of those every year it seems!

>>16184713
What are the chances space is mentioned in the 2024 prezy debate

>>16184718
10-15%

>>16184713
>>16184718

>>16184715
*candidate

>>16184667
they don't need to human rate it because it won't be launching with humans on it. How many times do we have to tell you this?

>>16184713
>Trillions of dollars are poured into NASA
>NASA produces le abominacion again
NASA just isn't capable enough to pull this off, anon, even if it was somehow freed from the shackles of pork (it will never escape them) and "shuttle derived cost savings" it couldn't do it.

i shit my my pants!! change my diapperr!!!!

>>16184723
My Boeing stockbroker asked me to tell you to delete this.

>>16184672
Steel plate, but wider

>>16184672
Plain concrete should be good enough

thank god star factory and the doors on the bays are going to make it nearly impossible for NSF to grift as hard
(inb4 people donate to watch a live stream of a wall)

>>16184753
They'll do streams when the doors open and shit, but otherwise continue their 24/7 multi-camera streams pointed at the tower (empty), the bays (closed), and Star Factory (wall).

>>16184731
literaly the first blackstronaut ever

>>16184706
I kinda like the design. Why tungsten though?

>>16184758
Oh ow

>>16184379
the real philosophical problem with artemis was the conceit that you could control costs by lowering the launch cadence. that was the thinking from the start - that we'll keep using expensive shuttle hardware, but we'll launch it so rarely that we can start cutting jobs. and since we're going to the moon instead of LEO, nobody will complain if we only launch once a year. but it's turning out that there isn't some sustainable low-cadence equilibrium. instead nasa's manned spaceflight operations are in a death spiral, with costs per mission rising faster than they can save money by delaying and cancelling missions. and the only thing that might shake nasa out of this 20-year delusion is chinese moonboots.

It's all against one here - the rogget either takes off or it doesnt.

>>16184771
It's a 50/50 chance, then.

>>16184772
Perhaps

>>16184767
Why are they forcing it in this way. The natural trend is the satellite launched and tourists. Fuck the moon, give us a space station hotel with space saloon with whores and gamba.

>>16184237
>starship refueling will never work
There's no reason why you can't just pump the fuel in space to another tank
>and if it did then it's thanks to nasa, not elon
oh ok you're just seething because you're overreacting to fags loving elon. Have you considered being rational like a white man?

>>16184341
They've been trying
NEOCam has been proposed numerous times over the past decade and B612 has tried and failed to get one privately funded

That was before Falcon 9 though...

>>16184783
you can have space whores on the moon too

>>16184322
no single person is ever going to make an orbital class rocket

>>16184702
Just drop a huge weight from orbit and punch a hole through the ice. Or just drill but that's probably worse than just melting through it. Submarine would have ai in it and it would link up to the lanter to upload data periodically and receive software updates

>>16184783
>Fuck the moon
it's free real estate

>>16184683
SS-Otrag

>>16184807
nu/sfg/ will not comprehend this.

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1792580873801343015

Would you rather:
a) visit the moon
b) visit a space station

>>16184830
What an easy question

>>16184830
??? There is no competition here, the answer is obvious.

>>16184665
Screencap this post:
>NASA will "fire" SpaceX from the HLS after Artemis II successfully completes, tagging off to the Blue Origin HLS

...Which is just as well, because Starship was never anything but a heavy-launch LEO system anyway. Musk basically absconded with $3 billion with a completely false "HLS" objective to fund Starlink with taxpayer money. And they'll let him get away with it, because the DoD loves the low-latency and what it did for the Ukrainians.

>>16184683
That's the Super Dee Duper Heavy.

https://x.com/spacex/status/1792625975601054003
New kino go check it

>16184851
bad bait
BO's lunar lander is not happening this decade, or ever:
>launching on a rocket not built yet
>relies on transferring hydrogen on orbit
Just these two things make blue moon almost a pipe dream, but there is more.

>>16184807

>>16184858
Its over

>>16184858
is this the same as wet dress rehearsal and did they fill all tanks with oxygen and methane

>>16184863
they're actually testing putting the tiles under the steel in this pic.

>>16184851
>tranny self insert picture
>white hot seethe about musk
many such cases

>>16184863
this fud was already stale the first time it was posted.
these tiles were never installed

>>16184863
Feels like tiles always drop around there

>>16184868
Thanks for the (You) kind stranger!

>>16184873
>i am not actually shaking with rage
reminder that HLS will work perfectly and starship cadence will only go up

>Starship now has a launch rate of every 3 months
wagmi

>>16184868
Get madder and see if it helps reality come around to your fruity Mars fantasies, MuskRat.

>>16184876
>HLS will work perfectly

>depends on ~20 refueling flights launched in short order over a six month period as the fuel boils off in the target HLS
>that ridiculous top-heavy design that's lugging 30 meters of empty fuel tank with it to the moon for some reason
>Starship isn't even attaining escape velocity dead-empty
Press X to "Doubt".

>>16184864
yes and yes

>>16184880
>that ridiculous top-heavy design that's lugging 30 meters of empty fuel tank with it

when you can say contradictory things without blinking an eye

>>16184880
>20
>fuel boils off
opinion discarded
>for some reason
it uses all of that tank.
i'm sure you can figure out what the tank is for.

>>16184858
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1792629142141177890

two weeks like I said >>16184219

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1792630560201875755

>>16184886
Bulk of the fuel is to lug that monstrosity to the moon. Once there, the extra volume is superfluous. Rational engineers would just discard that section, but Elon wants his meme rocket to look like a "Starship" the same way his dorky Cybertruck looks like a 1980s South African tweenager's idea of a "future truck".

>>16184891
>Shuttle required >6 months of rework
elon LIED
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-51-J
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ST-61-B

>>16184880
post another smirking woman you look just like her queen

>>16184893
>discard that section
fundamentally bad design. reusability is key.
even blue origin realized it with their HLS

>>16184894
>Atlantis first and second flights
>3 years for its third flight

huh

>>16184882
pretty sure the upper Starship tank isn't filled in your picture.

>>16184302
we can't see killer asteroids from earth surface anyway, the atmosphere blocks the infrared light that's most useful for this
you need either a radar survey (think Arecibo in space) or an infrared survey

>>16184899
>fundamentally bad design

>staging is fundamentally bad design
Even the fucking Falcon9 discards its second stage.

>>16184904
>Even the fucking Falcon9 discards its second stage.
And its a dead end for it.
It can never be cheaper than its second stage, really simple to understand.
Fully reusable will be the only means of space transportation save for niche science probes.

>>16184901
You might need to educate yourself on where Starships's tanks are.

>>16184738
Well hopefully 8 years from now some of the dinos in congress/NASA will finally be gone (Looking at you, Bill) and Starship will be pretty much mature. Assuming we haven't yet gotten in a hot shooting war with China, it's likely geopolitical tensions will still be high enough that a Chinese moon landing would give us another Red Scare/ Sputnik moment. If we can't into space for the love of science and exploration, then we'll do it to dunk on commies.

Thoughts on these "new" NIACs?
https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/stmd/nasa-doubles-down-advances-six-innovative-tech-concepts-to-new-phvv4x4ase/

>>16184891
>2 weeks
The man said it himself

>>16184891
AAAAHHHHH HE SAID THE THING I’m going insane niggerman!!!1!

is he /here/?

>>16184909
Are the methane tank and the oxygen tank touching the same wall between them?

>>16184913
>>16184915
>>16184916
where the fuck do you think the 2 weeks meme comes from in the first place

>>16184928
Yes

>>16184916
2 weeks

>>16184916
whomst

>>16184929
>He doesn't know that the 2 week meme comes from /pol/ during last election

>>16184929
we know

>>16184929
trump is here?

>>16184941
get in, everyone

>>16184912
how do you mess a url up that bad? it's https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/stmd/nasa-doubles-down-advances-six-innovative-tech-concepts-to-new-phase/
>This mega constellation low-frequency radio telescope uses thousands of autonomous SmallSats capable of
i'm sold

>>16184942
how long is it going to take to get to mars?

>>16184944
2...

>>16184943
mb captcha

>>16184943
>electrical power is possible from the 62.5 W Pu-238 pellet from a general purpose heat source using a 0.28 eV bandgap TRC operating at 600 K. The necessary array includes 1,125 cm2 of TRC emitters, or just over 50% of the surface area of a 6U cubesat. With a mass (heat source + TRC) of 622 g, a mass specific power of 12.7 W/kg is possible, over a 4.5x improvement from heritage multi-mission radioisotope thermoelectric generator (MMRTG) was shown. Building on our results from Phase I, we believe there is much more potential to unlock here.
>Radioisotope Thermoradiative Cell Power Generator

I wish NASA would move on from Plutonium as a power source. It all but ensures that only NASA would be able to fly next-gen RTGs.

>>16184891
>prefacing the heat shield
its over.
tiles even fell off on the last static fire.

>>16184928
yes, unlike with hydrolox the temperature difference of liquid methane and liquid oxygen does not cause the liquid oxygen to freeze

>>16184949
they didnt see >>16184871

>>16184948
would be nice if they went back and took a look at the old enriched uranium designs

Why is Musk caliming shuttle heat shield took 6 months of refurb when that's patently false?

>>16184958
Because its true. It just wasn't refurbished after every flight

>>16184956
it'd be nice if somebody got their act together and synthesized copernicum-291 already

>>16184902
>A still more drastic nuclear proposal, not to deflect dangers but to detect them, was put forward by Arthur C. Clarke in early 1993. Project Excalibur would explode a 1,000-megaton device on the far side of the Sun for Earth’s sake, and flood the Solar System briefly with microwaves, allowing the identification by radar of everything more than 3 ft across within the orbit of Jupiter—except objects on the Earth-Sun line at the time

>>16184962
oh nice, I guess stealth in space really is a meme.

>>16184970
you can't really detonate a gigaton bomb to find guided vehicles because they will know what you're doing and change orbits

>>16184961
Contrary to what I have said before I actually respect everything about you, treat you as my universe population and seek to better us.

Remember to report the namefag spambot

>>16184695
vaginas extend, flare out and envelop the penis coming near at high speed
it's a bit freaky the first time you experience it

>>16184938
>>16184941
Kek it's been so long that I've seen it in a political context that I actually forgot
Although I'm pretty sure Elon has claimed 2 weeks for Starship and/or other stuff before so the two kind of blend together at this point for me, but true, 3/6 months was an earlier Elon-based time meme.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLq0Wer6cno
>New Tower 2 Developments and FAA Update! | Starbase Update

>2x2 more weeks
epic

>>16184956
kilopower when

>>16184952
wouldn't this cause one or the other to boil though

>>16185025
I love two more weeks.

>>16185043
They don't actually fill the oxygen all the way to the bulkhead so they don't touch

>>16184938
two weeks is a lot older than that

>>16184962
yes, the active radar survey is the conventional alternative to this
much more focused beam, less gigaton nuke, more jobs

>>16185042
Fag technology.
Nuclear is meant for bombs and continuous detonation torch drives.
Everything else is a shameful waste of this god given technology.

>>16185043
no!

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1792653911662428389

both solarfags and nuclearfags btfo and actually the same that I have been arguing here previously

>>16185053
> doesn't want to build and explode a gigaton bomb

>>16184911
You are woefully optimistic on how things would go, you only need to look at the CHIPS act to know that throwing more government money at something doesn't guarntee quality.
The US government is incapable of going to the moon absent of SpaceX

>>16184989
>>16184938
Retards the lot of you.
It came from the Covid lockdowns, it was "two weeks to contain the spread" and then they got constantly extended.

>>16184962
Incredibly based

>>16184911
>Chinese moon landing would give us another Red Scare/ Sputnik moment.
In 1957 the USG wasn't filled with people the USSR had funneled vast wealth to.

>>16185063
>It came from the Covid lockdowns
no it didnt kek.
It came from James Charles on TikTok 3 months ago.

>>16184894
>elon LIED people DIED

>>16185049
then why is there no separation visible in the image >>16184882

>>16185073
Go back to the sharty retard we dont want your soijacks here.

>>16185063
huh I though it was "only 2 more weeks before Trump reveals his masterplan and retakes the presidency" during the 2020 election

>>16184962
I involuntarily said "based" out loud

>destroys all spacecraft in its vicinity

>>16184865
Are you making that up or is that true?
The Saturn V’s S-II stage used an internal insulation layer, and I’ve heard lots of credible people say that SX should go for that route

>>16184807
>>16184861
The level of based was off the charts and the jews literally stopped them at any cost. Fucking imagine where we'd be if OTRAG succeeded

>>16184208
Two weeks, but Elon wants a "funny" date, let's say June 9th then

IFT1 4/20 (dude weed lol)
IFT2 11/18 (this one isn't funny)
IFT3 3/14 (Pi day)
IFT4 6/9 (dude sex lol)

>>16185090
Otrag was a gay design; not going to elaborate.

>>16184865
from my recollection reentry temperature gets close to the melting point of stainless so this could maybe work?

>>16185091
>he doesn’t know why 11/18 is funny

>>16185094
interplanetary reentry temps ≠ LEO reentry temps, just as a reminder

>>16185097
kek

>>16185102
Good thing starship is a leo truck.

>>16185091
Ngmi

>>16185105
This comparison is inappropriate

>>16185090
Setting up shop under Mobuto Sese Seko was a tad controversial though.

>>16185094
no, it destroys the heat treat that close to the melting point, plus steel actually becomes butter

>>16184498
not me, I thought of the hole it leaves in plate glass when you shoot it with a bb gun, with a nice razor sharp cone down on the ground somewhere.

>>16185113
We must all do controversial things, for the progress of mankind

>>16185105
good point but I hope SS ends up being way more than just “LEO starlink and a few HLS lunar landers”
It’s designed for Mars. At least, that is what I want to believe.
But right now, SX knows there is $$ to be made in LEO (with Starlink) and at the Moon (Artemis lander, Gateway construction, Gateway resupply, commercial lunar rideshare a la Falcon 9 LEO)
Mars isn’t even on the practicality/engineering radar. It’s on the PR side, for sure. And Musk-Shotwell claim it’s ‘a primary goal trust me’—but they say that about rig launches and Earth-To-Earth as well, and that’s obviously not even being considered in the design right now.
Does anyone agree? Disagree?

>>16185134
its obvious that Mars is a recruiting ploy.

>>16185134
when I saw them working on printed dwellings with simulated martian regolith at starbase it convinced me that they actually do want to do mars. It would have been much more public facing if it was a pr stunt. As to when mars happens and in what form remains to be seen.

>>16185147
that was literally a recruitment stunt for children anon. They brought a school bus full of kids around at the same time and then disassembled it all.

>>16185134
part of me genuinely believes that musk has some autism in him that makes him want to go to mars
They've talked about nuclear starships and 18m starships which is very overkill for leo

>>16185173
18m starships are even more LEO optimized tham 9m

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmLJq5aPBqc

>>16185090
a sustained campaign of libel and innuendo

>>16185147
were those Martian or Lunar dwellings? Or unspecified?
High chance it could just be a side project, for the Moon (i.e. Mars is still not on the radar)
>>16185173
I take it Musk & Shotwell are indeed serious. And it’s not wrong if Mars / E2E are simply longer-term goals, either. But I don’t think it’s factoring in to the Starship we are getting. At least as of right now.
>>16185176
!!

>>16185181
I swear I've heard Musk has some internal SpaceX team working on the Sabatier process and that was Tom Mueller's last project at SpaceX. Makes me more likely to believe him in getting to Mars.

>>16185179
I wish von Braun had killed more brits during WW2. The numbers are actually quite unimpressive

>>16185179

>>16185189
the UK is slowly fading into irrelevance and it's people are being replaced. Their time will come soon

>>16185184
SpaceX has a Mars Principal Development engineer, who has presented at the Mars Society multiple times

>>16185192
what's his name? Curious to see if theres any videos

>>16185195
Paul Wooster

>The biggest breakthrough in rocketry, arguably since the advent of the Vergeltungswaffe-2, would be an orbital launch vehicle where all stages are reusable and where that reusability is cost efficient.
>-Elon Musk, 2007

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1792682640270938286

>>16185200
He just makes this stuff up

>>16185203
That metal? Elonium.

>>16185203
I still dont believe the rockets are coming back down. Maybe balloons?

Why don't more rockets get built out of enriched uranium?

>>16185203
he makes it up and then makes it happen

>>16185214
This is how you get astronauts with gulf war syndrome

>>16185216
True

>>16185218
there are no burning oil fields in space

>>16185203
>>16185210
It's probably just a slightly modified variant of 304L, which has a relatively wide range of compositions.

>>16185214
Proliferation risks and fears of radiological accidents.

>>16185199
> not calling it the Aggregat 4
fuckin casual

>>16185200
if spacex is able to create advanced alloys with steel, then imagine what advanced alloys with other metals we could be making but arent. we could be landing on jupiter with supercritical uranium alloys or some shit.

>>16185214
too heavy

https://x.com/FutureJurvetson/status/1792672666316665198
>SpaceX has grown to 87% of the world's tonnage to orbit, a new high. The graph uses a magnifying projection to even see the other domestic launch providers. The five Chinese launchers combined lofted 13.6x less than SpaceX. Europe was zero.

So what happens when "it" happens?
I feel everyone in the industry is holding it's breath that it's not otherwise possible for SS and booster to work as intended
What is the chance you see pic related twice in a single day with the same damn booster?

>>16185236
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1792689139470704718

>>16185236
Russia is consistently putting in an overperformance given its circumstances

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1792690117947314323

he can't keep getting away with it

>>16185237
I am not smart enough to say what is and is not possible about Starship reuse targets. I would say, from observation, that it'll take a few years to start approaching the kind of cadence we're seeing with Falcon 9.

>>16185237
Never going to happen. It will be like Falcon, they will rotate through a fleet of boosters and ships for rpaid cadence, but individual vehicles wont fly more than twice a month

>>16185245
https://x.com/SawyerMerritt/status/1792679889272992010
>BREAKING: SpaceX has announced that Starlink now has over 3 million customers across ~100 countries, up from 2.7 million last month, and 2.3 million in December 2023.
>SpaceX added a record ~6,800 customers per day on average over the last 6 weeks.

>>16185248
I think everyone has been over-estimating just how long it takes a reusable launch system to ramp up its flight rate once its online. The assumption seems to have been that once you can land your rocket you'll suddenly be SpaceX in 2023, when the reality is at best you'll just be SpaceX in 2017. China has two Falcon 9 equivalent rockets set to make their first landing attempts in the next twelve months and they're still planning things like the LM-8A and LM-12, and they're leaning into them so hard they're going to build a dozen new launch pads for them at Wenchang.

>>16185253
https://x.com/Starlink/status/1792678386353213567

>>16185253
They're making 4 billion dollars a year on normal customers, not including the weird boat contracts or telecom partnerships, and they are continuing to grow. SpaceX is on track to be the largest company on Earth. The absolute fucking madman is actually going to privately fund a Mars mission. Holy fuck

>>16185249
Why not? What constraints are you expecting?

>>16185256
Wow thanks Elon for bringing even more brown people on to the internet. As if 1.3 billion pajeets shitting all over the internet wasn't bad enough.

>>16185270
What constrains Falcon 9?
Do you really think they have or will fix every single one? Big leap of faith. The burdern of proof is on SpaceX to show results, since they have been recovering Falcon boosters for over 8 years and have never demonstrated rapid reusability. Their boosters have the same turnaround time as shuttle orbiter. They have a big fleet which enables massive cadence, something Shuttle could have also done if there were 10 orbiters and the necessary procurement rate of tanks and SRBs

>>16185200
He's been claiming this ever since the switch to stainless yet they still use the bog standard 304L from the usual suppliers

>>16185281
>Their boosters have the same turnaround time as shuttle orbiter
10x faster. You can tell someone has no clue what they're talking about when they compare shuttle refurbishment to f9 reusability

Reminder that the Starship tile trouble arc hasn't yet begun and once it begins will NEVER end lmao

>>16185289
>10x faster
source?

>>16185200
Rearden Metal

>>16185236
Why is china choking?

>>16185281
The constraint on F9 cadence is second stage production.

>>16185293
There are individual F9 boosters with 20+ flights now.

>>16185293
Fastest orbiter turn around was 51 days. Latest I can find for spacex booster turn around is 27 days but that article was a few years old so good chance they’ve beaten it by now.
>>16185305
There are orbiters (singular) with 39

>>16185305
Yes. And those boosters have been flying for 3 to 4 years so thats an average of 5 flights a year. Shuttle cadence.
>>16185303
Probably, but why don't they turnaround a booster and fly it next day as practice?

>>16185308
No Shuttle flew more than twice in a year.

>>16185312
Wait and see true cadence on the Starshuttle orbiter. It may surprise you.

>>16185312
Well close enough (within order of magnitude)

>>16185237
Everyone knows it will work, I think people like ULA and RocketLab and Europoors are just hoping it won’t upset the market and are semi-coping with thinking it will be unprofitable for a long time. They’ll be right for maybe 7 or 8 more years, but in a decade it will begin to
grow similar to how F9 has
I think SS will underperform for a while and never be as good as originally promised, but will increase in capability like an fine wine nonetheless

>>16185306
>There are orbiters (singular) with 39

Enterprise flew 5 times.

Columbia flew 28 times over 22 years.

Challenger flew 10 times.

Discovery flew 39 times over 27 years.

Atlantis flew 33 times over 26 years.

The current flight leader of F9 boosters, 1062, has flown 21 times in 3 years.

Less than 2 per year for any individual shuttle vs. 7 (and counting) per year.

>>16185326
Atlantis is named after some obscure Woods Hole sail ship that a) still exists and b) now belongs to Argentina and is hard to find modern information on

>>16185331
Um I think it's named after the fabled lost continent

>>16185325
>Everyone knows it will work, I think people like ULA and RocketLab and Europoors are just hoping it won’t upset the market and are semi-coping with thinking it will be unprofitable for a long time. They’ll be right for maybe 7 or 8 more years, but in a decade it will begin to
>grow similar to how F9 has

If this is true, it's a hopeless cope regardless, because Starship's justification is launching Starlinks, not commercial launch services.

>>16185335
>nobody tell him

>>16185236
western europe: 0

>>16185345
Shut up faggot

>>16185337
F9 has rekt the smallsat market with rideshares. Why won't starship rek regular satellite market with similarly scaled rideshares. Especially with all the tug services coming online.

>>16185363
No demand.

>>16185364
Satellite launches will just stop? Wow that's crazy tell me more.

>>16185364
there’s barely any demand for LEO rideshare and SpaceX kinda just ate it up bc they can offer it for a reasonable price with a good product. Lunar rideshare will probably be exactly the same. Not many people want/need to go in the first place, so ehh let’s send it to on Starships 1-of-6 rideshare flights this year or whatever. Maybe people will choose blue glenn bc they’re contrarian or whatever, but it’ll overwhelmingly be SS in a decade

>>16185363
Starship will wreck the regular satellite market, just as a bonus of what SpaceX wants to do with the system. The cope of ULA and other launch providers is hopeless because it doesn't need any of the commercial launch market to exist, but they benefit from providing for it regardless, and they increase the capacity of the market like no system has before.

>>16185223
Yet

>>16185364
>No demand
Why would people be building a bunch of 150t satellites before starship is running

>>16185400
> a bunch of 150t satellites
like what?

>>16185412
NRO would launch 150 ton satellites if you gave them the option

Why is the goal to “make it past hearing?” Doesn’t reentry get easier after that?

>>16185417
perbraps it should be 'make it THROUGH heating'

>>16185414
Boeing offered SLS as an option for national security launches and the NRO said that they were absolutely not interested in anything in that size category. The trend in the community right now is moving towards distributed constellations of smaller satellites since those are cheaper and more resilient when targeted by conventional asat weapons.

It's over for SpaceX, Mars is a deathtrap.
https://phys.org/news/2024-05-astronomers-mars-potentially-hazardous-asteroids.html

>>16185417
Because of all the exhaust and debris and smoke and shit, you can't use cameras to verify that a spaceship has landed. They use microphones. So "make it past hearing" means the microphones heard the rocket land.
This is also why landing on the moon is so hard, no sound in space.

>>16185429
>>16185419
>>16185417
Heating goddamnit lol

>>16185291
Everybody knows scamship will end up being expendable.

'Fast movers': Meet the Chinese satellites that zoom around for inspections—or interference
>Weeks after arriving in orbit in February 2019, China’s TJS-3 and its apogee kick motor were approached by Russia’s first Luch/Olymp, which came within 30 km, according to tracking data provided by Satellite Dashboard. While Luch/Olymp had previously approached Chinese communications satellites, this appears to have been the first red-on-red approach of one maneuvering satellite by another.
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2024/05/fast-movers-meet-chinese-satellites-zoom-around-inspectionsor-interference/396714/

why do they assume that china and russia are being hostile to each other instead of secretly cooperating?

>>16185437
because they've never really cooperated on space

>>16185417
Launch Starship, dayo!

>>16185412
>like what
Are you retarded? Everything is easier if it can be heavier. If starship was available when JWST was being developed they could've spent that same 10 billion developing tooling to manufacture and launch one per month of the original 8m design or bigger. We could have a dozen of those things. It could weigh 23x as much

>>16185063
wrong, nobody bothered to brain archive that "2 weeks to contain the spread!" gayness, the "in 2 weeks" meme used so often now on here (and on /pol/) comes from the aprox 3 month period after the 2020 election, and by the time Joepedo was inaugurated it had been used so often as the answer to "When are the white hats going to step in and stop this election theft?" that it had already basicaly become a shitposter's go-to for any "When?" question.

>>16185459
Revisionism

have they started building the second tower? i cant find an nsf thread about it.

>>16185461
yeah, gay, I mean guy, we all lived and breathed those "2 weeks to stop the spread!" days, my bf and I stayed in bed under the covers the whole time

>>16185476
i just saw that they're working on the pilings and have brought a tower segment but i dont see anything about work on the tower having being started

>>16185476
The pieces are at Sanchez I think

>>16184602
they didn't fund it because JPL and Shelby pitched fits

>>16185459
nah, two weeks has been a meme since at least the 90s

>>16185086
Is it all silica rock on the surface, or is there iron mixed in? Other interesting mineral deposits? Io is a hell hole but it's the only solid ground in the Jovian system. We'll probably never live there, but if there is iron and other goodies there, it would be an important assest for any Jovian Colony

>>16184962
I would assume with today's more sensitive radar systems a much smaller, more practical nuke could be used? Or is it still a pipe dream?

GO-LoW is the most based idea astroonomers have ever proposed and i think they deserve to be thrown a bone for once

>>16185253
>~6,800 customers per day on average over the last 6 weeks
Lmao the company i work for is several of these.
>be major infrastructure construction company
>mobilize to site that you'll be at for 6-40 months
>usually somewhere with little to no internet services
>we can pay to have local ISP run fiber or trad phone cable over the new poles we had to install for power and get put over the barrel cost wise for a shitty product
>or we dust off the starlink terminal(s) from the last job and plug and play from day 1
It's been a piecemeal adoption so far with individual job teams buying/setting up service, but now across the company we are starting to accumulate an inventory. Apparently there's some buzz from up top thay we're gonna cut some corporate deal with Starlink to have unified company wide support

What did Elon mean by this

UNNNGGGGHHHH GOONING TO STARSHIP EXPLOSION YESSSS TWO MORE WEEKS US MORE ELONNNN WE MUST EDGEEEE TO LAUNNNCCCHHHHHHAUAUUUUUUUUUGGGGHHHHH

>>16185553
Not spaceflight fuck off

>>16185557
Exactly, why is Elon spending so much time browsing random trash articles about shit that doesn't matter when his rocket is failing over and over?

>>16185558
Shut up faggot youre a retard

>>16185559
you're somehow worse at posting than elon is at tweeting

>>16185200
>I've finally managed to convince enough employees in our skunkworks division to willingly sacrifice themselves to otherworldly powers
>In exchange, we've been given the secret of an alloy that lets us get rid of the heatshield tiles and just go with bare metal, delightfully counter-intuitive

>>16184891

>>16185577
Why dont you just shut your fat gob you stupid american eh?

>>16185553
>kosher approved outrage
>wow this is crazy
>PUSSY IN BIO

>>16185326
You forgot Endeavor retard

>>16185414
Can the NRO pls figure out how to build some retarded 1 kilometer wide unfolding spy satellite dish, then cram it into starship

>>16185670
>>16185667
>>16185660
Samefag

>>16185675
Fuck off retard

>>16185670
They could fit what, three in Starship's cubic kilometer of volume?

>>16185679
learn to speak like an adult

>>16185675
God i wish

>>16185675
Try again retard.
I'm not any of those posters

/sfg/ has only had a single samefag poster ever since 4chan got rid of the unique IP counter

>>16185701
Yeah, me

>>16184962
>Oops, I blinked. Can we get a do-over?

>>16185414
150 1-ton satellites?!

>>16185743
One of the sweet spots is approximately 10 tons. Probably no more than four, given volume limits.

>>16184341
>paid for by some glowing fuckhead.
yeah this anti-starship seethe has chicom and fsb propaganda spam all over it. They are seething hard at the absurd increase in tonnage to leo burgers got with one single company

>>16185427
And?

>>16185420
A lot of medium size dumb cheap satellites can still be distributed and might be cheaper unit wise anyway
And does it give you much more redundancy to ha e 10k instead 1k sats? One sat is still a very small part of the whole in both

>>16184667
>Starship is the weak link with artemis lol
Literally none of the hardware for the artemis missions is currently ready
>b-but orion/SLS
Where are they then?
There is no SLS ready for launch right now and apparently they can't even reuse the orion
They don't have a launch vehicle, they don't have a capsule, gateway isn't ready, the suits from axiom aren't ready, the rover isn't ready and none of the landing craft are ready.

Why put all the blame on Space X when every aspect of the mission is behind schedule?

>>16185877
Space ship man bad

>>16185877
In foreign agit-prop, the focus for criticism always goes towards the perceived threat. They did the same shit with the F-35.

>>16185882
is that why they make biden look senile?

>>16185896
Biden's doing that one to himself.

>>16185899
well musk is doing it to hls himself because evidently it isnt ready

>>16184667
It takes 10+ launches because it's putting 10-20 times as much mass onto the moon.

>>16184667
Its funny how NASA even allowed that ridiculous lander concept. SpaceX could have built a LEM style lander to go ontop of Falcon Heavy if they were serious about fulfilling the contract, and it would be launching already. Blue Origins lander is no less ridiculous. This era will go down in history and NASA will reverse hard on their policy of giving companies freedom to choose what they want to do with the money.

>>16185916
No it isn't, according to >>16184379 it can barely deliver anything to the surface aside from the 200 tons of fuel it needs to wobble back into lunar orbit.

>>16185921
A LEM lander would be pointless. The entire point here is conquest of the Moon to keep it away from the Red Chinese, which means practice at landing enormous cargo ships.

10 days until launch

>>16185931
2 working weeks

What is the real redpill of spaceflight?

>>16185961
There are no redpills, only black.

>>16185964
What is the blackpill then?

>>16185877
apartheid emerald mine you stupid fuckin chud

>>16185967
No life anywhere in the rest of the galaxy.

>>16185905
Of all the systems in the Artemis architecture, the only two systems that are ready are the heavily funded and highly conservative SLS, and the undersized and underspecced European Service Module. Orion has been in development even longer than SLS and is a mess. The Human Landing System didn't even get selected until 2020, and has barely been funded.

>>16185973
that's a whitepill

>>16185253
HUEG

>>16185973
Not a blackpill. It means there's no competition and everything can be colonized by the human race.