/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7358955
Can we get confirmation that the worms and cabbage survived?

>>7358955
My name is Elon Musk he said
And in 5 years you're all dead he said

>>7358987
They'll live in our hearts

ULA pls go

i literally cried

>>7358995
>ULA
Not even close. We, at ESA are laughing our asses off.

>>7358955

Dubs confirm.

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

ELON ON SUICIDE WATCH

>>7358987
Last words from the cabbage were "Oh no, not again."

>>7358955
So India can send a payload mars-bound. But SpaceX can't even reliably get a supply mission to the ISS.

This is why you don't contract out things to 2nd rate cash-grab companies.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY ELON!

musk is gonna be fine

he went through worse shit than that

>a problem
No shit!

Can we kill /vg/ please?
>>>/vg/107754116

>>7359063
>/kspg/
>Kerbal ShitPosting General
Who would have ever thought they would have ended up with being edgy

>>7358955
Russian, French and Japanese are laughting.

>>7358955

>>7359063
That's nothing
>>>/pol/47168782

and that's why spacex doesn't go public

>>7359091
Oh fuck, now I know why every other board hate /pol/ to their core.

>>7359091
>/pol/ screams to the happening every single minute about everything
>eventually something actually happens
>HURR WE KNEW IT DURR
I hope NSA has those who regularly broswe that board under control.

Elon Musk edit when?

>>7359091
How do you even get that many retards on one board?

>>7359007
Is ESA success rate even as good as SpaceX?

>>7359118
ESA has been around for a LOT longer and has had WAY more successful launches.

>>7359118
M8, Ariane 5 is the most reliable commercial vehicle ever built. It has like 70 consecutive successes.

And ESA's new lightweight rocket, Vega, sports a 5/5.

>>7359131

>Ariane 5 is the most reliable commercial vehicle ever built. It has like 70 consecutive successes.

And the X-37 was able to be in orbit for over a year, and then be reused twice

Hella f*cking epic

Wow, /vg/ literally does not even like games >>>/vg/107794203/ "DON'T BUY THIS GAME"

>>7359135
And this is relevant because...? You're comparing a mini-shuttle to a launch vehicle, which are completely different things.

And it's not even a spacex ship

>>7359143
Don't cherrypick sentences, they have a sound reason to say that:


>NOTE: The general consensus at /kspg/ is that you should torrent the game rather than purchasing it. The developer Squad is incompetent, extremely mismanaged, and is very resistant to all feedback or criticism. Furthermore, despite being poorly made, lacking a proper development team, years of unfixed bugs, and being in need of a serious physics and optimization overhaul, Squad has gone ahead and decided that they're just adding several new features, and have jumped straight to version 1.0 without proper balancing and bugfixing just to boost sales. With their performance to date, it's clear they do not deserve your shekels. If and when Squad begins developing KSP like the competent adults they like to play at being and stops acting abusively and manipulatively towards their community, we'll remove the above disclaimer. Until then, we as a community have decided it stays.
>Understand that we here at /kspg/ don't hate KSP. We've simply grown bitter over the way Squad has dragged such a promising title into the mud, and hope that our input might help to keep this sinking ship afloat a bit longer. However, we cannot in good conscience recommend buying this game to anyone.

>>7359150
Every fucking general is like that.

>>7359150
Why even play the game then?

>>7359108
Best I could do.

Doesn't every space rocket company have insurance?

>>7359157
>/kspg/
>Playing KSP

>>7359160
Yes but can't replace things like a docking adapter over night.

This sets SpaceX AND Commercial Crew back badly.

>>7359154

>that NASA tv right now
awkward...

Feel bad for Elon, it's his birthday today..

>>7359164
>>>/vg/edg/ "No content! Do not buy!"
>>>/vg/scg/ "Scam!"
>>>/vg/gsg/ "Paradox shills gtfo" "Play blackice, new shit's for casuals!" "Muh Furher mana!"
>>>/vg/twg/ "Fucking RII"

>>7358955
Hopefully that'll silence the SpaceX fanbois who frantically shill for their beloved messiah. For a little while at least.

>>7358955
Good thing they clarified that the launch site was on Earth, I had no way of knowing otherwise.

>>7359181
>next time everything will run smoothly
Every time!

>>7359181
> SpaceX fanbois


you mean Reddit

>>7359183
>Not launching your spaceships from Cape Canaveral, Florida, Mars.

>>7359185
>Reddit
Half /sci/ is a SpaceX fanboy, the other half is a hater.

>>7359194
Of course, half of /sci/ is engineers and they want to suck Elon's dick.

Any speculation on what caused this failure?

>>7359201
Second stage tank leak/failure before 1st stage sep

>>7359201
Depressurization of second stage LOX tank due to dynamic pressure.

>>7359201
its da joos

>>7359201
residual semen in prop tanks

Elon Musk verified
There was an overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank. Data suggests counterintuitive cause.

>>7359194
/sci/ confirmed to be 2 people.

>>7359201
Russian sabotage

Russians botch a mission and the next US launch which happens to be carrying equipment that will eventually eliminate the US need to rely on Russia for crew launch blows up? How convenient for the Russians

>>7359209
So the venting valve didn't work properly and the second stage blew up on its own?

>>7359048
He's being professional. Is this more to your liking?

>>7359217
>russian sabotage
>not ula sabotage

>>7359209
Where did you copypaste that from?

>>7359223
https://twitter.com/elonmusk

>>7359223
Elon Musk official twitter account

Why is NASA streaming mourning footage for the Shuttle?

>>7359063
>>7359143
>>7359150
>>7359154
>>7359157
>>7359161
>>7359164
>>7359170

get your shit together spacex its not rocket science

>>7358955
Elon Musk is never going to achieve any kind of success in his lifetime.

>>7359235
Except for where he got things into orbit
And those things docked with the ISS
And was the first private company to do so

>>7359235
He already has had plenty of success, though.

I just want to go into space

why is it so fucking hard

who came up with this stupid atmosphere bullshit anyway

why can't gravity just stop working

it's not fair

>>7359228
Don't know dude
It's in bad taste tbh

>>7359222
Sabotage seems more like Putin's thing

>>7359228
Probably a bit of "imagine what could have been if we got the funding for this shit".

So nearly 50 years ago humanity was able to go to the moon and return safely. Now this is bleeding edge rocket science.
Excuse me if I'm unimpressed.

>>7359260
We need the old NASA back.
But where's the funding now?

>>7359260
Blame governments, not people.

>>7359241
>>7359238
no shut up

This one singular failure completely nullifies any kind of success he could have had.

why can't he be more like a space agency that has never had a failure, like Russia? Or NASA?

>>7359269
NASA and Russia never had failures? wut?

>>7359201
see here
>>7359209

>>7359275
The N1 never blew up comrade.
American propaganda

>>7359035
>So India can send a payload mars-bound. But SpaceX can't even reliably get a supply mission to the ISS

One is an organization concerned about cost-effective and successful missions. The other is more concerned about fame and generating hype to sucker in investors.

Another Elon Musk business FUNDED BY THE TAX PAYERS.. aka YOU!

That evil motherfucker is a the biggest welfare queen in the world! He became billionaire by getting tax handouts from government.

Fuck him!

> Elon Musk's growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in government subsidies

>Los Angeles entrepreneur Elon Musk has built a multibillion-dollar fortune running companies that make electric cars, sell solar panels and launch rockets into space.

>And he's built those companies with the help of billions in government subsidies.

>"He definitely goes where there is government money," said Dan Dolev, an analyst at Jefferies Equity Research. "That's a great strategy, but the government will cut you off one day."

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html#page=1

>>7359255
nah

NASA wants and supports private market for space transportation

>>7359163
They built two of them. Actually, I don't know if they've finished the building second one yet, but they planned to launch two docking adapters all along.

>>7359299
>cant decide which is which.

>>7359305
that article is bull of bs.

musk even went on TV to shed light on those false claims / propaganda

>>7359305
nice bait

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT23JrwZiAo

>>7359137
Hullo and fuck off scoot

>>7359317
>SpaceX
>Cost-effective
>Successful

>>7359320
>>7359318
hahaha.. look at these retarded Musk dicksuckers... ahahahah

maybe the gov should stop wasting money by funding this jackass and his idiotic rockets.

we can spend this money on something that hasn’t been done.

fucking rockets... we did this shit 70 years ago!

>>7359333
>very cheap rockets
>1/19 failure rate

Madskillz from 2ch

>>7359358
When JAXA is anything more than a joke, they can make fun of this.

>>7359342
>grossly underpays and overworks engineers
>tells them they are helping humanity explore space with their hard work
>pays for today's launches with tomorrow's tickets
>has a receipt with lori garver's name on it
>every other expert in the industry says the spacex business case doesn't add up, and looks like a ponzi scheme.


>cost effective

>>7359365
>>7359342
>>7359341
>>7359333
>>7359305
>being this ass-blasted
there could be 4 more falcon 9 failures and it would still be cheaper than a single ULA launch

>>7359358
So are retards unable to differentiate SpaceX from America?

>>7359087
I doubt it, since the last Russian resupply mission to the ISS also failed on launch.

>>7359372
This.

All of the Falcon 9 rockets could explode, and they could be rebuilt faster than ULA could launch, too.

>>7359260
>So nearly 50 years ago humanity was able to go to the moon and return safely.

Lot of people died in the process. Space race back then was reckless, it was really a dick contest without much consideration of consequences. Now we have better things to spend cash on (preventing deadly diseases outbreak, preventing countries from turning into terrorist swamps, etc.) and a more cautious way of handling things.

Also the landing on the moon really wasn't obvious at the time. There's a reason they managed to do it only once.

cargo list:

http://www.spaceflight101.com/dragon-spx-7-cargo-overview.html

>>7359387
>The original Meteor hardware was expected to arrive aboard the International Space Station in October 2014 on the Cygnus Orb-3 resupply craft that unfortunately was lost in a launch failure of its Antares launch vehicle
Jesus
They must be having one hell of a day

>>7359380
>There's a reason they managed to do it only once.

You mean besides those other apollo missions that landed on the moon, right?

>>7359380
>once

wut

>>7359010
That silence

conference started now.
https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html

>>7359380
Apollo program had a lot of problems but Saturn wasn't one.

could this guy ramble on more?

What kinda rocket ship you want fam?

>>7359442
JUST

Why is the spacesuit 'eventually'
Can NASA not afford another spacesuit?

THANKS OBAMA

Man they're fast.

>>7359117
Ask moot.

>>7359463
ULA works 24/7

when are we going to stop building rockets out of archaic metal and start molding them out of ceramic ferrofluids?

>>7359452
BLOW

>>7359472
when it becomes cheaper than said archaic metal.

>>7359463
Gotta get that tax money til taxpayers relize u are raping them

>>7359472
>archaic metal
>ferrofluids
>ferro
See the irony? (pun most definitely intended)

>>7359470
I'm putting money on ULA's next flight failing.

>>7359280
What?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m79UO4HOQmc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkFGlU2iEKU

>>7359488
Sarcasm.

HE DIDN'T FLY SO GOOD.

AHHHAHAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA

1. This sucks. It puts back the next Spacex launches by months until they know exactly what failed.
2. BTW since the composite dynamics Spaceship 2 failure, has their been any news when they will be able to test again? Has Branson finally caused Rutan to have heart failure?
3. Musk was shitting on the French Ariane program pretty badly a couple of months ago.
Le champagne camarade?

>american engineering
Top kek. Only Russians can into space.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsQOpD4TIZM

>Today was also Elon's birthday
LMAO
M
A
O

25 years from the V2 until Apollo 11.
The next 45 years was spent on maintenance.

>>7359219
It looked like the second stage powered up before meco and separation. But that's just my crude visual interpretation from the same images everyone else has seen.

>>7359568
The ISS is well beyond Apollo-era tech,

>antares failure
>space ship II crash and death
>progress failure
>two (2) proton failures
>falcon 9 failure
Why has the past 7 months of space travel been so shit?
Does anything in spaceflight history even compare to this?

>>7359007
>laughing our asses off
Pretty sure you're just reflexively unclenching your sphincters now that your space agency doesn't look 100% irrelevant at this junction.

http://www.esa.int/About_Us/DG_s_News_and_Views/Message_from_Jean-Jacques_Dordain_on_SpaceX_loss

Message from ESA's director :

"We at the European Space agency deeply regret this failure that shows that sending launchers into space is a very hard job. However a failure does not undermine all the previous successes. We wish our colleagues on the other side of the ocean all our best in fixing the problem and getting into flight again soon"

Pretty contrasting with the "In 5 years you're all dead" from this turd Elon to European space leaders (11 years ago, btw).

>>7359591
>salty americans can't take the fact that their space industry is behind Europe's nowadays
Amusing to watch tbh.

Eh, not to easy to make rockets now than german rocket engineers stay in Europe, right? :^)

>>7359581
>inb4 N.Korea

NASA DOES IT AGAIN. MORE OF YOUR TAX DOLLARS PISSED AWAY BY INCOMPETENT GOVERNMENT FUCKWITS

THE TIME HAS COME TO LET THE PRIVATE SECTOR TAKE OVER SPACEFLIGHT. GET RID OF THESE FEDERALLY FUNDED FLUNKIES AND BRING IN SOME ACTUAL PROFESSIONALS.

>>7359160
Commercial launches are insured, government launches vary. This one probably was not. It's the payload operator who buys insurance not the launch provider.

>>7359620
>yurop in charge of not causing a kessler event

>>7359201
capitalism

>>7359626
US government launches are "self-insured", i.e. uninsured.

For the DoD, they can't even tell an insurance company what's on the satellite, so how could they get insurance? NASA isn't as crazy, but they still cover the loss themselves; it's built into the CRS program.

>>7359631

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Engineering_Technology/Clean_Space/What_is_Clean_Space

>ESA having a orbit removal/mitigation program (Cleanspace) while the US waves dick by destroying satellite in orbits.
>All satellites manufactured in Europe are designed to re-enter atmosphere.
>All the while NASA refuses to fund a program like Clenaspace BECAUSE THEY'RE BROKE

Worse than hitler tbh. ESA's the best agency now.

>>7358955
no one will care in a day

barely anyone even cares now. reddit and every other pleb are still bending over for musk

>>7359646
http://spacenews.com/nasas-interest-in-removal-of-orbital-debris-limited-to-tech-demos/

>>7359646
>ESA's the best agency now.
Second to best korea's, I agree

>mfw I read The Martian yesterday and this happens today

>>7359625
While you're at it, get the government out of my Medicare.

>>7359646
>the US waves dick by destroying satellite in orbits
That's a funny way of spelling "China"
>All satellites manufactured in Europe are designed to re-enter atmosphere.
lolwut
they just leave their shit in parking orbits just like everyone else

Enjoy your taxpayer subsidized industry

>>7359380
Only a few people died during the NASA space programme, we went to the moon many times. it is obvious that private companies simply do not have the money to pull this off.

>>7359656
While there is interest as >>7359646 neglects it isn't being designed into future launchers. ESA developed launchers like Vega and A5 ME will have upper stages which carry out reentry burns after separation. With US new launchers there is no serious talk of this.

Cleaning up is Ok if you have a few big items like Envisat or CGRO but it cannot work if you are producing more debris than you can remove. It's just not sustainable.

>>7359664
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA-193

The US and China are too busy comparing their dicks while Europe actually takes on space exploration.

And yes, all ESA satellites deobrit within 25 years after their mission is done, by law. Nothing of the sort exists anywhere else, and certainly not in the US.

This is why you don't send manned missions on newer rockets. Sometimes trial and error is the only way to discover design flaws.

>>7359631
>ESA will carry the first active debris removal in 2020 on Envisat itself through the DEOS mission
>NASA doesn't do jack shit about space debris

>>7359664
The US carried out an ASAT test right after the Chinese in a fit of impotent rage. While it wasn't as damaging due to the better orbit it showed the same shortsightedness.

>Enjoy your taxpayer subsidized industry
ULA to name just one.

>>7359676

>only a few people

Kek every other NASA launch was a fucking catastrophe m8

JUST

>>7359698
That's how my (Kerbal) space program works.

>Oh, that bit was more flexible than I predicted...

>>7359698
It was an unmanned mission.

>>7359725
I am aware.

>>7359684
>Given Envisat's orbit and its area-to-mass ratio, it will take about 150 years for the satellite to be gradually pulled into the Earth’s atmosphere.
You want to try that again m8?
Looks like your space agency doesn't even follow its own laws.

>>7359699
>NASA doesn't do jack shit about space debris
of course not, they need more money for muh jobs creator SLS program

>>7359701
nobody's defending ULA here
The fact remains that ESA was on their knees BEGGING for more money from the EU to help compete with spaceX
Even your own Airbus company is more humble

Now we know how Musk builds his rockets so cheap.

>>7359735
Shit happens.

>>7359735
>builds

>>7359676
>Only a few people

Probably a couple dozen of them at least, which is a sizeable proportions of people manning the mission.

NASA didn't go to the moon that many times.

Anyway, it's foolish to expect it to be easy now when it was already hard then and funding is harder to come by nowadays.

Speculation is that the NASA payload may have caused unforeseen pressure that caused a rupture in the tank.

>>7359731
>Looks like your space agency doesn't even follow its own laws.
The Cleanspace initiative did not exist at that time.

Plus Envisat is actually going down in 2020, as >>7359699 pointed.

You have no excuse

>>7359735
We don't know how from this accident.

But we know the consequences.

>>7359752
The worms escaped during launch. They turned out to be part if ISIS

>>7359735
Nah, he does that by paying young graduates industry lagging salaries under the tagline 'we're going to Mars!'

"I think we’ve got a decent shot of sending a person to Mars in 11 or 12 years."

It's a fucking joke, they're struggling with LEO. That's 1950s tech.

>>7359731
>The fact remains that ESA was on their knees BEGGING for more money from the EU to help compete with spaceX

You're talking out your ass. ESA doesn't get money for launchers from the EU. It is not an EU organisation, the only collaboration between the two is on navigation and earth observation.

>>7359772
>they're struggling with LEO
Yes, it's not exactly rocket sciens- oh wait.
Isn't this the Falcon 9's first failure?

>>7359731
>The fact remains that ESA was on their knees BEGGING for more money from the EU to help compete with spaceX
>Even your own Airbus company is more humble
You're mixing up ESA and Arianespace. Arianespace and Airbus are related.

>>7359537
Literally laughing my ass off!

>>7359772

And what have you contributed to spaceflight, shitposter McGee?

>>7359752

I FUCKING TOLD YOU CUCKS

NASA BTFO

>>7359731
>The fact remains that ESA was on their knees BEGGING for more money from the EU to help compete with spaceX
The EU has nothing to do with it. Plus now that Arianespace is privatised, even CNES (French space agency) doesn't help them anymore. All that even though Arianespace is doing both SpaceX and ULA's job at the same time. They play the game more fairly than the US tbh

If nothing else this is a major blow to their image.

Now they're just like every other rocketry organization.

>>7359782
Second failure, it had an engine explode in flight 4 that meant the secondary payload was lost.

Space X totals, it's the 5th failure, giving them a success rate of 79%, which is still pretty solid compared to say, Orbital's recent launchers.

>>7359787
More than you, less than Elon.

Doesn't mean I can't lend a critical eye, spud :^)

>>7359659
Me too.
AND I watched Apollo 13 two hours before the launch.

This is some spooky shit.

>>7359826
Get off my lawn.

I watched four episodes of Dirty Pair on 2001-09-10.

Spookasaurus Rex.

>>7359523
>Le champagne camarade?
Oh oui

>>7358955
Why are people so eager to shit on SpaceX and Musk? I understand that the reddit fanboys who suck on his cock are pretty fucking annoying but any person or company that endeavors to advance our space related technology, should be welcomed, not shunned like this. Why aren't people more disappointed that this failed?

Mars was supposed to be 15 years away. Now it's back to 30. I bet the Jews did this. They are desperate to keep us on one planet.

>>7359305
>Elon Musk is opening space to the world and building electric cars
>Welfare queens will breed more ghetto rats that will rob and rape and riot for more welfare
>Guess which one progressitards would rather give more taxpayer money to

>>7359851
The only good welfare queen are ex-welfare queens

Pic of Star Parker, the ex-welfare queen progessitards love to hate

>hear rumbling outside
>"Oh, I bet a rocket is going off"
>look it up
>"yep, and I have a feeling it will explode again"
>go take a nap because I honestly don't care about rockets, it used to be a monthly thing in Florida and it's boring
>wake up
>it did explode

Welp.

>>7359007
ESA is too unambitious spacetraveling-wise to laught at someone who aims for more.

>>7359847
>implying this is more than a 6 month setback

>>7359868
No, this is SpaceX so 6 months is really 24 months.

>>7359772
>graduates
Here is the problem. The 60s space programme was built upon seasoned V-2 veterans. A kid fresh out of school is just going to fuck shit up.

>>7359863
see
>>7359593

Plus Europe tends not to give a fuck about human spaceflight (despite them building half your Orion spaceship), they focus more on science and technology. (Which, personally, I think is better than try to impress the peasantry with "human achievements")

elon cuck aka king of redditors

>>7359858
>google her
>she's 58
Holy shit I wish I was black.

>>7359372
>>7359378

>I don't actually know how much any of this costs or how long it takes to put a launch together

>>7359844
because /sci/ is full of edgy autists

>>7359863
>unambitious
>Poorly funded
FTFY

USA are an entity that exists just to shovel taxpayers' money into corporations, so american space industries can afford to do the weirdest shit, and people like deGrasse Tyson make an insane amount of advertising while running their own pop-sci media industry, while Europe has less pop-sci ads and ESA has to beg for money from 20 different (mostly poor) countries.

>>7359847
spacex has literally nothing to do at all with going to mars.

>>7359893
The contract price for a falcon 9 is 61 mil
It's on their website you dumb shit

>Elon fanboys on suicide watch

>>7359863
Landing on a comet was ambitious.
JUICE is somewhat ambitious.
AIDA has some potential ambition.
Exomars may be routine for NASA but is still more than others hope for.
What kind of ambition are you hoping for? Uranus/Neptune orbiter would be nice and NASA doesn't seem interested in doing it.

>>7359844
Jealousy. Don't worry most of /sci/ will never achieve anything because they will spend their entire lives trying to bring others down to their level instead of raising themselves up to the level of more successful people.

>>7359851
>opening space to the world

where do you people get this shit?

>>7359844
The reddit fanboys are just that unbearable that their tears give me pleasure.

>>7359900
>>Poorly funded
That just means less missions. Not less ambitious missions.

The Horizon 2000 programme and Cosmic Vision produced a lot of world firsts and world bests.

>>7359900
What is wrong with spending on pop-sci? it gets kids into real sci.

>>7359880
Not if Elon overworks his engineers 4x as much as he does right now ;)

>>7359903
NASA paid double that for the CRS launches.

Of course SpaceX was quoting a bit over $80 million for a normal commercial Falcon 9 launch back then.

And its still half what they paid for Orbital Science to fuck up their launch.

>>7359913
Compare it to Rocosmos who have a similar budget but all they do is service the ISS.

>>7359900
ESA is more stable because of it's diverse funding. No government in ESA can decide tomorrow they want to kill an ESA programme, agreements are signed and binding. In the US however congress reserve the right to cancel any program at any time regardless of international contributions or cancellation fees.

ESA also don't have to convince all 20, for nonessential programs a single country is all it takes.

They certainly aren't as well funded but giant missions aren't on the chopping block every other year.

>>7359844
>Poorly paid and overworked employees, devalues jobs in the rocket business.
>Strange 'muh entrepreneurs' cult of personality in the US.
>Arrogant

But some of it's probably jealously.

>>7359935
And ESA isn't as restricted in who it can work with as NASA.

>>7359844
musk is actually a really smug cocksucker, and shotwell is as two-faced as any basic middle school girl. They put intolerable faces in front of the company and so when something goes wrong, its easy to make it personal.

As for commercial cargo, I've been a critic since the beginning. my only disappointment is in the whitehouse for forcing bolden to take nasa down this path in the first place, and in the risk this poses to station.

>>7359935
The funding uncertainty is a really valid criticism in how nasa has to operate, everyone hates it and would prefer the russian model of locking funding for much longer terms.

>>7359946
>tfw we'll have an EU-China 3D-printed moon base in our lifetimes

>>7359929
Nonsense, cast your mind to the scientific success of Phobos-Grunt and Koronas-Foton.
They do have science programs they're just shit, things are either delayed (forever) or are ESA partnerships. Spektr-UV (Spanish and German input), and eRosetta (Basically now all German) will be interesting if they ever launch.

>>7359581
oh dont forget LDSD failure as well.

Seriously though fuck this shit, Space is hard.

>>7359844
Part of the reason is their flashy PR boosted image.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcaBI_I0Td0

It's fun to shit on them and him. While Orbital ATK is some dull corporate monolith.

>>7359948
>I've been a critic since the beginning
NASA saves a lot of money contracting spaceX to supply ISS a few times, all the time it went right you probably were quiet. One time it fails and you act as if you knew all along.

>>7359958
This tbh. Same as with Apple

>>7359958
>Making spaceflight cool again

>"We hate them because of their flashy PR image"

G-Go away, other boards

> Spend half of the budget on communication and cool designs
> Surprised when they end up with an exploding piece of shit
Why americans never learn ?

>falcon heavy wont fly this year

>>7359967
>cool
For you.

>>7359967
you dont need to emulate apple to be cool in spaceflight. spacex's branding is over the top.

>>7359974
You wont to argue that SpaceX isn't a cool company?
because that's objectively wrong.

>>7359264

the funding ended along with the cold war

if you want another moonshot or nuclear rockets or other crazy things you have to start another cold war

>>7359969
The rumbling from the rocket interrupted my video games, I can't help it. Though honestly, you couldn't tell there was an explosion, just sounded like your typical Florida rocket launch.

>>7359974
>>7359970
>>7359962
>>7359958
>>7359978
>b8ing this hard

>>7359967
>implying we need the outbursts of na arrogant 40-something billionaire to consider spaceflight cool.

>>7359983
>implying the US aren't doing that right now

>>7359967
Space X is only cool with the "adults who still play with lego blocks" crowd.

>>7359961
>all the time it went right you probably were quiet

cool assumption bro, completely wrong but cool nonetheless. So while it's been going 'right' why don't you tell us how many times spacex has actually made deadlines? I mean, if you only have half-knowledge, that's cool too. Not too late to bow out.

>>7359973
we knew that before it exploded, falcon heavy wont fly until early summer 2016

>>7359990
>1 billion per launch rocket
>ever launching
top kek m8

>>7358955
This is why Neo-Liberalism and that inane privatization craze is stupid.

Corporate fuckers and their CEOs, DONT TOUCH MY SPACE-EXPLORATION!

This is humanity's future, not their faggy 'dreams'. If they want to realize their dreams and have too many billions to spare, they should go and buy themselves an old Russian Mig or something. If these fucks crash, they will do humanity a favor.

>>7359989
I have respect for his ambitions and I trust him not to disappoint me.

>>7360005
>everything is the fault of liberals

>>7359990

the USAF has the x-37 but it's unclear if they have anything more

on the bright side, regardless of what happens with spacex/ULA NASA more or less has a shuttle replacement ready for immediate use

>>7359996
>probably wrong
probably not

>>7359958
>While Orbital ATK is some dull corporate monolith.

orbital is run by old guard vets of lockheed/aerojet/ATK/boeing/grumman that have all read Kelly's skunkworks book, and want to emulate him. Their attitude is to keep their traps shut, dont make claims they can't back up, and be professional. Might look dull, but that's just looking at it as an outsider.

>>7360005

>being this butthurt

m8 without those "dreams" you wouldn't have regular state based space investment. NASA itself arguably exists because private companies like Boeing wanted a way to sell the US government really expensive things like rocket motors or parts

>>7360010
>thread has been hovering at 90 replies for 50+ posts
Sure is butthurt samefag SpaceX hater in here

>>7359921
NASA is paying for a Dragon capsule and downmass from ISS, not just a standard Falcon 9 launch.

>>7360000

Even the Falcon 9-R is essentially an oversized V2 missile with RP-1 instead of alcohol. Failure rates are not massively lower either.

I'd like to see another approach at getting mass into LEO. No idea how, but going from first principles there must be an alternative approach that's feasible.

yall haters

>>7360015
>NASA itself arguably exists because private companies

And this is when the US ceased to be able to design and produce rocket engines on their own, relying on Russian communist designed ones.

Back then during space race, space exploration was a state led endeavor. And this is when it was successful.

Someone dig up the orbsplosion thread.

>>7360023
>an oversized V2 missile
Haven't ALL our attempts been that?

Let's hope Skylon werks

>>7360015
>NASA itself arguably exists because private companies like Boeing wanted a way to sell the US government really expensive things like rocket motors or parts
It's pretty easy to generate wants wherever you want by doling out money with healthy profit margins for contractors.

>>7360047
We need an oversized V3 cannon.

>>7360023
A horizontal takeoff aircraft is theoretically possible but even more of an engineering challenge. The brits are hopefully going to give it a shot in the next decade.

Space elevators are basically silly science fiction.

>>7360026
>And this is when the US ceased to be able to design and produce rocket engines on their own

It happened when the air force refused to pay for a new engine design.

> NASA itself arguably exists because private companies like Boeing wanted a way to sell the US government really expensive things like rocket motors or parts

I think you'll find it's quite the other way around. the government wanted to get better at flying stuff, so it started paying for an agency to do research on flying stuff. contracts were drawn up with existing aircraft manufacturers to assemble hardware, who were originally created to serve the warplane market demand of the government. Nasa wasn't made for contractors at all, the contractors grew up to serve nasa.

>>7360026

I mean that NASA was established so that companies like Boeing could hawk products to three organizations, instead of just the air force and navy.

>>7360062

space elevators are possible, assuming a strong enough material can be made. In our lifetimes, having a prototype one or one that can lift a small car isn't unfeasible

I WANT TO BELIEVE

>>7360023

There's like 50 different ways. Problem is money. They'd cost a lot to try out and there arent oodles of funds out there for trying out new shit.

>you will never leave this rock

Muh hope now rests on China, and a new space race when US unfucks themselves due to the Chinese threat.

Here, have a Long March 7, which is a Falcon 9 equivalent.

>>7360077
do you seriously believe that?

>>7360101
I still can't believe that 凹凸 are real Chinese letters.

>>7359380
man I know that a lot of unintelligent shit goes down at /sci/ but this is next level

>>7360101
And the Long March 5, a 25t LEO rocket.

why all the doom and gloom?
one failure hardly means the halting of all american rocket programs

>>7360106
>凹凸

literally the best pictograms.

I wish the rest of their characters are also like this.

>>7360113
one failure and it's over.
Homosex apocalypse just begun.

>>7360114
>凹
concave, hollow, sunked
>凸
brow, forehead, bump
>凹凸
unevenness, roughness, ruggedness

they make sense, at least.

Any info about where the debris came down?

>>7360143
Over you're mom's house.

The aliens are just keeping us in check.

>>7360159
We found their colony on Ceres
They've sent us a warning

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTom8xVzFdo
Aside from being a terrible failure, it's pretty fucking cool

Literally blown the fuck out.

>>7360190
I was at a friend's who usually doesn't care for this stuff.
Told him it would be cool and that they might land the rocket....

welp

>>7359131
The Falcon9 has had 1 failure in 19 launches, if we don't account for launch #4's secondary payload fail-to-deliver (the F9 performed it's main mission delivery)

The Ariane 5 had 4 failures in it's first 14, though the next 66 have been issue-free.
It is also 10 years old and thus they've had a lot of time to learn and improve from -their four failures-
I would expect the next 2-3 years, and ultimately the next 10, of SpaceX to be very promising by those metrics.

What's unfortunate is not the premature 2nd stage failure, it is the lifter stage not able to come back for what was likely to be on of the last landing errors, if not the first successful recovery.

>>7360234
>tfw this was supposed to be your day and stage 1's day
>tfw stage two fucked it up for both of you

>>7360234
>not counting partial failures for spacex
>counting them for arianespace

Fanboi pls.
>>/reddit/

>>7360234
didn't you read the comments?

SpaceX is a cheap garbage company with overblown pr budget.

look at this nigga trying to be rational and shit

>>7360248
>Partial failures
>1 (secondary payload only)

Meanwhile the Ariane5 partials WERE physical things breaking.

To me it's a huge difference, to you it's a source of shitposting.

>>7360248
OK, fairer comparison.

In 19 Falcon 9 launches it failed to deliver a secondary payload once and had one kaboom.

In the first 19 Ariane 5 launches they had two partial failures where the rocket under performed and put payloads into the wrong orbits and two kabooms.


Any way you slice it the Ariane 5 had more trouble in the same amount of launches. Here's hoping the Falcon 9 follows the Ariane 5's further track record in the future because after the initial troubles it has been performing quite well.

>>7359581
>Does anything in spaceflight history even compare to this?
yes, this is still within the typical yearly failure rate (just in one cluster). For some reason, launch failures tend to cluster in threes. Much depends on how many failures we have over the rest of the year.

And things have been way safer than the beginning of the space age, naturally. SpaceX was due for a fail. Even the Soyuz/Progress failures are less of a surprise once you realize they are still phasing in the Soyuz-2 improvements. It is the older Soyuz-U that has the impressive 700 successful launch record. Proton is the only one that has been failing more than expected, and they are planning to phase it out in preference to Angara over the coming years.

>>7359882
This, I think the approach of science & tech before humans is much more intelligent.

>>7359243
>wake up tomorrow
>no gravity
>can't have sex anymore
fugg D:

>>7360380
You naysayers will have your tails between your legs when soon:
http://blogs.denverpost.com/nerd/2015/06/13/pornhub-wants-3-4-million-to-make-first-ever-sex-tape-in-space/4435/

>>7359380
most retarded post I've seen on /sci/ today

>>7360365
With this sort of mentality it would take 100 years to put a man on mars, or anywhere else in space for that matter.

You need ambition and competitive spirit to truly realize new heights in any industry. ESA lacks this trait.

>>7359380
>the landing on the moon really wasn't obvious at the time. There's a reason they managed to do it only once.
Are you from a parallel universe?

>>7360458
I should add that SpaceX has this, but they seem to be struck with one too many unfortunate failures.

>>7359124

More successful launches =! higher success rate.

> "The failure was SpaceX's first by a Falcon 9 rocket after 18 successful missions."
> 19th launch
> 18-1

YFW /sp/ FOUND A WAY

>>7360512
>18-1 = 19
?

>>7360520

He was saying 18 success, 1 fail, not 18 minus 1, anon.

>>7360520
18 Wins
+
1 Lost,

Sometimes there is a third number denoting Ties (wins)-(losses)-(ties).

I feel sorry for the people who worked on it
They probably dont have a job anymore

>>7360470
But in this case it still is. You have a 89% for F9 and a 95% for Ariane 5. And I'd guess that with today's assplosion, the bayesian probability of failure at next flight will be much higher for F9 than Ariane 5 (it's nearly zero for Ariane 5 btw).

Europe gave the world the most reliable commercial rockets ever. (And rockets in the first place for that matter.) Hell, and that's just for Ariane 5. Now that all the cubesat builders rush on the lightweight Vega rocket for their launches, the European rocket industry is even healthier than predicted. And let's not even mention the huge OneWeb 650-sat contract Arianespace snatched a few days ago.

SpaceX is doing a relatively good job, but they're nowhere near ESA's level.

>>7358987
My cabbages!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiMhue3iSd4

>>7359715

HAIR PLUGS


BTW, what is the objective of this enterprise?

To make orbital insertions cheaper?

>>7360062
Pre-cooled hypersonic jet engines are too fucking complicated to ever work. It's hard enough to get a hypersonic scram jet to work and that is literally one of the conceptually simplest machines out there. We should stick with rocket engines. They work so long as you build them properly. the only issue with rockets is the price. Bring that down and there is no problem. Maybe spaceflight isn't a technical isue but an economics issue. Ford made cars cheap overnight without actually changing how they work. If we get more people going into space more frequently the price will probably come down.

>>7359881
The problem is that they burn through their employees after 2 years. I think the average age is like 28 or something ridiculous there.

Getting graduates isn't the problem. Its keeping them so that you actually end up have veteran engineers that know what they are doing.

>>7360648
more like to make insertions in your mom easier lmao

>>7360699

>>7360458
I think you completely missed his point

shit
not another one
i habeeb in spaceX but they keep having issues

>>7359048
:(

>>7359086
underrated post

Im still trying to figure out why anyone cares about this spaceX thing. Even if it worked then what? Launching a satellite becomes just a little bit cheaper? Wow. Its fucking nothing.

>>7360852
more like a tenth the cost

>>7360852
we were all pretty excited to see it try to land. Even if it failed, that shit is more fun to watch than it exploding on the way up.

>>7360860
Are you a bean counter at NASA? Why do you care? Why should I care?

I'm pretty sad at this..

>>7360869
Because cheaper travel = more stuff in space

and more stuff in space is cool

>>7360869
opens up space considerably for lots of industries

space mining for dem sweet minerals

less of a roadblock to moon colonization and just space stations in general. mars too.

>>7359364
Have you seen Robotics;Notes?

This kind of reminds me of the whole obamacare website debacle. You know, hiring an outside contractor (CGI Federal) to assemble an infrastructure (healthcare.gov) that failed.

Only now this is centered around the for profit space x corporation.. hmm.. do I sense a correlation between inadequacies in the private for profit sector to that of the public non profit sector? No I must be dreaming.

>>7359902
>spacex has literally nothing to do at all with going to mars.

>Musk: SpaceX is not going to go public until we reach Mars.

>>7360247
>Of Course I Still Love You
>Just Read the Instructions
>"we need to be careful of AI guiz"
Why is Musk such a fucking hypocrite, /sci/?

>>7360869
Cause Musk wants to launch enough satellites to have free wireless internet.

>>7360956
He's not; he just craves the attention.

>>7360918
/pol/ get out

>The students from North Charleston, South Carolina, had come up with an intricate electronics circuitry experiment. It was supposed to fly last October to the International Space Station on an Antares rocket from Wallops Island, Virginia.

>But it blew up as they watched from so close by.

>On Sunday, their chance to re-fly their experiment soared high into the air, but the Falcon 9 rocket broke apart more than two minutes into space above Cape Canaveral, Florida.

>>7358955

Did the astronauts survive?

>>7361312
Everyone on board died.

>>7361316

How many?

>>7361322
All of them.

>>7361329

Were they trying to get off feminists to the moon to decrease their weight?
Is that why it exploded?
The engines couldnt support the mass?

Because its sexist that only men walked on the moon?

SpaceX is dead after this.. All these crashes and this worrying late-stake catastrophe... it''s all over for them.

SpaceX is KILL

>>7361345
What the hell?
This is the first failure for the Falcon9 heavy, and rockets blow up all the time. This isn't even all the surprising, let alone "the end of SpaceX",

>>7361345
>calling crashes on experimental landings a failure

>>7360918
commie detected

>>7361370
>Falcon9 heavy
wut
>>7361457
>experimental landings
>implying they reached that phase of this launch
I guess the second stage breaking up and debris falling could be considered an "experimental landing". They were just ready for the wrong kind of experimental landing.

The capsule supposedly survived and was sending telemetry for some undisclosed period of time. Too bad it couldn't have popped its parachutes. It still wouldn't have saved the docking adapter though, as Dragon ejects the "trunk" before landing.

>>7360059
underrated post

>>7359183
I expect to watch live mars launches one day