/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7907004
>inb4 fail

[math]
\mathbf{M}
\mathbf{U}
\mathbf{S}
\mathbf{K}

\\

\mathbf{I}
\mathbf{S}
\\
\mathbf{G}
\mathbf{A}
\mathbf{Y}
[/math]

I'd love to see it explode, but a soft failure will be good enough, even if PR regards it as "good enough".
Another leg failure or minor issue that results in destruction will mean reusable parts are unreliable, which is actually the case.

>>7907004
Are we there yet?

TURN ON CNN

IT BLEW UP

>>7907494
No way.

>>7907475
meme overload. can you crop each of these into their own separate images.

>>7907513

It would be funny if it went boom now after so many delays.
Can you imagine being Musk then?

>>7907475
>>7907561
>jpg

Fly my pretty

>>7907004

How many burgers till the launch lads

>Upper level winds still a watch item

>>7907727
That's an odd way to spell boat

>>7907712
2 hours, give or take

>>7907712
Less than 2 bongs

I am not even excited anymore. SpaceX are singlehandedly killing my love of spaceflight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIkPP2LM8DU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muDPSyO7-A0

>>7907884
>SpaceX are singlehandedly killing my love of spaceflight
Dude, just stop watching live launches. This isn't the 1960s when nobody had VCRs.

These are routine commercial launches, which may be delayed for any number of reasons.

>>7907884
You are just a commie pussy

>>7907004
How would you get steampunk technology into space?
>So far ive got load a shuttle into a steam cannon that is flown into the upper atmosphere.
Could you even get into space using steam punk technology?

>>7907973
I'm so glad they're doing the Technical livestream. I love being able to actually watch the rocket launch and not some millennials sprouting PR shit while in the background we can see people watching the actual launch.

>>7907980
>These are routine commercial launches, which may be delayed for any number of reasons.
tired of being late because you missed your bus? Because the train was late ? Because the plane couldn't take off?
Want a new reason to be late for your date on venus? Fear no more, we bring you SpaceX, with the full "I'll be late" package.

>>7907986
definitely not, too heavy and not enough energy. If you pushed the limits I'm sure you could make a gi-fucking-gantic airship, and try to launch something from it into space, but I doubt it would make it far outside of the atmosphere.

>>7907988
Yeah I got tired of them after 20 minutes. They couldn't be duller.

go spacsex!

Stream is live!

My body is so fucking ready

Music!

Which is the better webcast again? Technical or full? In other words which one lets me watch the actual launch, telemetry etc.? Technical right?

>>7908038
Aye, 'tis Technical.

>>7908039
Fabulous

SHIP, WAT R U DOING THERE?
https://www.vesselfinder.com/?mmsi=369493623

>>7908044
Oh fuck off is that in range?????

>>7908044
YOU ARE IN THE ROCKET LAUNCH HAZARD AREA

>>7908044
OH FUCK'S SAKE ULA IS BACK

ELON SEND THE ATTACK CHOPPER

>>7908038
Both will let you watch the actual launch, telemetry, etc.

The full show just gives you more commentary and context, less watching the rocket on the pad.

What genre of music is the waiting room music they use before they start?

HERE WE GO

T-9 mins
they better not fuck up today

>>7908052
eassy listebtintg?

>>7908044
>CGxxxxx
>Vessel Type: SAR
That's a USCG boat. Probably there to prevent a repeat of earlier this week.

Don't remind us of the bullshit that happened last time. Just launch the thing

>>7908058
That's it faggot, I'm canceling it you ungrateful BITCH.

will it happen?

if roll 5-9, yes
0-4, no

>>7908052
delayporwave

>>7908062
BTFO

>>7908057
Specifically one of these.

>>7908055
I think that will get me a bunch of slow jazz. Specifically the scifi-sounding easy listening

Maybe it's just called scifi easy listening?

INTERNAL POWAH

>>7908062
FUCK

No hope left

Launch already

>>7907172
Why are you so bitter? Couldn't get a job offer from SpaceX?

>men trying penetrate sky with phallic objects
Ugh, hate STEM.

Good luck SpaceX!

Range is clear, that's all that matters

>that qota negro

>>7908062

welp, sorry guys

>Here's that breathing sound again

FUCK

darth vader's on scene again

the erector is de-erecting

>>7908079
It's the rocket, teasing us.

>>7908078
not good enough
if it doesn't happen i'm blaming you

>>7908082
the erector has de-erected

WE'RE GO FOR LAUNCH

If dubs it will fly.

>>7908090
shit

Godspeed Falcon 9!

LIFTOFF

IT GOES IT GOES IT GOES

FUCKING
HAPPENING

It's about fucking time

THE ENGINE'S ON FIRE?

IT'S FUCKING HAPPENING

M E C O
E
C
O

>>7908102
Trolling this bad

What did he say happens at T+30 seconds?

MAX-Q!

AT LAST

>>7908106
Death

>>7908106
We all collectively jizzed.

Completely forgot about this. Glad I got here in time to catch the landing attempt.

>>7908102
I saw some sputtering near one of the engines but it doesn't look like anything major. Plus Falcon 9 has proven Engine out capability.

GO, LAND YOU FUCK

Damn Hollywood CGI looks good.

"Yeah, turn it over"

>dat shot

>>7908072
not even him but
>implying anyone sane in his mind would want that

Just like muh KSP

do we get to watch a barge rocket landing attempt this time?

But will it land?

On-board camera really improved.

>>7908120
Flip That Bitch Around is the official acronym

>>7908130
Except in KSP you would have just said fuck it on the first attempt and blown your shit up

>>7908131
Probably not. It's a pain to get a live feed from a or plane flying over a ship in the middle of the ocean. Easier to just record it and then fly the recording back.

Why no camera on stage 1?

if roll 5-9, experimental landing will be a success

>>7908136
Sounds like a yes

>>7908138
Hopefully the ship has a camera

Is that the edge of the Earth? Fucking awesome.

>>7908138
There is, but no telemetry. No where to send and receive the video feed

>Dat horizon shot tho

Majestic

>>7908139

>>7908139
critical 9

>stage 1 is trans-sonic

Fucking diversity and SJWs, invading our space companies

>>7908149

Kek'd

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo

HOLY FUCK WHAT HAPPEN

OH SHIT THE LANDING

JUST
FUCK
MY
SHIT
UP

YA BLEW IT

>>7908138
I'm guessing that the heat from 9 engines in the lower atmosphere doesn't play nice with cameras in that location for launch, and for landing there's more important information that needs to be transmitted live.

Rocket missed lmao

I hear cheering, good news?

>>7908144
DID IT MISS?

it missed

That video footage didn't look good. It look off-centre to anyone else?

>Rocket off to side
>looses feed
SHIT

Fucking IDIOTS at spacex can't into filming.

>>7908161
Same here.
Way off.

The rocket probably obliterated the platform

it missed and ripped the camera

That's a beautiful image of the horizon

>>7908161
>>7908162
Yeah looked that way to me too

>>7908161
yeah. Also it looked like it came down to fast, didn't it? That they lost contact with the barge just the moment the rocket would've slammed into it doesn't make much hope

>>7908161

Assuming the camera is center mounted then yes.

>no chatter about losing the barge
>no off-barge cameras

>>7908161
I'd say it looked close.

Does anyone have a webm of it?

>>7908163
they just made it look like lag

that shit was way off

>>7908171
She said 15 seconds beforehand that it was coming down faster than the successful landing

ded

>Can maintain a stable stream from a camera inches from a rocket engine a hundred kilometres up in space.

>Can't manage it on a boat off the coast of Florida.

F

>>7908179
>over the horizon
>uplink via satellite-pointed transmitter
>rocket comes in meters from your uplink dish, makes ungodly amount of noise
>expect to keep signal

Yep, looks flat.

>No commercial break for space food and ticket costs for the next commercial launch

rip barge

BERMUDA TRIANGLE CLAIMS ANOTHER VICTIM

YARR HARRRRRRRRRRRR

>view from stage 1 right now

>>7908177
that shouldn't make any difference for the last ~10 or so meters of the flight path we see though. The rockets thrust to weight ratio at landing is really high, even when they throttle the engine down as low as they can. Meaning that they have to hit close to 0m/s the second it touches the ground. If it's coming in faster that just means they have to start up the engine a little bit earlier while landing.

Press F9 to pay respects

They're being awfully quiet

IT WILL CRASH IN AFRICA

>>7908193
mission control just took their cyanide pills

>>7908185
I can't wait til space is monetised

F

>Press F9 to reload F9 :^)

Post yfw when you realise that, all this time America has been claiming that they've been trying to land the stage 1 on a set platform on land/at sea, when they've ACTUALLY filled the stage 1 with nukes and been dropping them on Russia and North Korea

>>7908193
they just don't transmit the high pitched weeping and noice of agony the engineers emit right now

>>7908190
You misunderstood

I said that 15 seconds before they showed the botched landing, the lady was mentioning that it would be coming in faster than the soft landing.

>>7908189
>>7908191

>>7908196
Big fucking glowing ads in the sky visible at night.

>>7908195

you mean Fluoride pills

>>7908205

that's a nice thought

Well at least the drone ship is reusable, right Elon?

>>7908200
>dropping them on Russia
All dark here.

>>7908195
>How do you want your Stage 1 Elon
>JUST

>>7908202
what difference does that make? That just means they have to start the landing burn earlier, or it will crash into the barge, doesn't it?

>>7908205
CocaCola logo on the Moon

>tfw thought they were gonna play Max Richter for a second
>tfw it turned into gay techno shit

>>7908205
soon
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/02/russian-crowdfunded-reflector-satellite-aims-to-be-brightest-star-in-the-sky/

>>7908205
>>7908212
A giant sign on the Sun that reads "Staring at the Sun can cause irreparable eye damage."

>>7908211
They didn't have enough fuel to slow it down

Stupid sexy SES satellite was too high test

Hype?
>Unverified reports that the #Falcon9 first stage experimental landing was a success.
https://twitter.com/spacexstatus/status/705904216535994370

>>7908211
Thats what I thought too, who knows. She was black so she could have said something completely wrong

>>7908216
>$23,000
Nah

>>7908216
Cool. That's how you should tackle global warming. AC the whole planet.

>>7908212

No a Pepsi logo you fool.

>>7908217

>>7908223
>$23,000
>Nah

My exact reaction

>>7908222
>https://twitter.com/spacexstatus/status/705904216535994370
Unofficial twitter with unverified info. Seems legit. Hoping its true though.

>>7908222
spacex is the one and only that can give you a yes/no on that

>>7908217
>Long beams of light that "connect" stars to illustrate constellations

>>7908222
trips confirm


(but then a big wave came and knocked it over. oops!)

FLYING OVER KANGZ

>>7908211
Not the anon you're replying to, but if stage 1 is coming in at a different velocity, it's trajectory is also changed. So it was probably fucked beyond all hope at that point even if they did have enough fuel for a longer burn

>>7908222
>https://twitter.com/spacexstatus/status/705904216535994370
Don't play with my heart

>>7908232
That would be great. But you know someone would make a giant dick constellation

>>7908228
Habeeb it

Vehicle is currently oppressing Africa

>>7908239
>Adverskysments won't be regulated

>>7908222
That dude is literally just trying to get retweets.

shit, NSF forums are fucking hammered (502)

>>7908240
>be in Africa
>see satellite going over
>quick, throw rocks at it

Anyone else irked that the regular stream had feed from Stage 1 after separation but the Technical one didn't?

>>7908242
They will be but sneaky lawyers will find some loophole.

>>7908244
>$90/year membership
>Site crashes

>The landing burn is believed to have been conducted with three engines.
Interesting

>>7908244
happens every time

>>7908244
oh fuck, did they land it?!

where the fuck in Gabon are they getting telemetry from?

>>7908218
that doesn't make any sense. If that was the case they wouldn't have gone for the barge. They don't crash a rocket into it for shits and giggles

>>7908257
the ground station there. it's used by lots of rocket operators, shared.

>>7908255
Yeah I remember hearing them say that "so far" only 3 of the 9 landing engines had responded/activated/whatever. So that can't be good.

>suddenly video
>snow in space

The fuck?

>>7908255
Makes sense, you'd likely need the extra thust to slow down in time and only using 2 engines probably wouldn't be stable,

>no word on landing
FUG

>>7908260
Where is that? Libreville?

>>7908257
>>7908260
http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2014/05/Libreville_tracking_station_in_Gabon

>guy on right is super fucking enthusiastic
>guy on the left is awkward as fuck

>>7908263
they don't use all 9 engines to land, only a max of 3 on boostback, one for the final landing.

WTF IS IT SNOWING ON THE ROCKET

>>7908258
Quite the opposite - they HAD to go for the barge precisely because they were short on fuel

SECO2!!!

>>7908269
thx senpai

>>7908270
left guy is especially nervous today for some reason

>>7908258
they had put the cargo into a higher orbit than first contracted, necessitating higher fuel use on the first stage

this means they were right on their margin for landing it before running out of fuel
I'm assuming wind and ship position relative to MECO might have pushed the first stage past what it could compensate for to land

anybody else want those two faggots to fuck off and just show live footage?

>>7908271
snow is not a good sign. Means something is leaking (or they landed in Siberia!)

Looked like the engine cut off a teensy bit early, but they say apogee is good.

>>7908271
Oh I didn't know that. So why are there 9? Like a failsafe for in case the 3 they planned ot use fail? Or is it 9 meaning the engines that were used during launch?

>>7908263
They never use all 9 engines for the breaking burn, and they always only use 1 (the center) engine for the landing. The stage is almost empty at that point, 3 engines proide absolutely enough thrust for that purpose.

>>7908283
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIkPP2LM8DU

>36000km altitude
wew lad

>2016
>There are still dead zones

Fucking track it with satellites if you have to goddam

>>7908283
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIkPP2LM8DU technical feed

>>7908283
Watch the technical stream.

>>7908283
open the technical stream. it's there just for you. Only audio is from the engineering net.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIkPP2LM8DU

>>7908283
Live footage of what? Watch technical stream then.

So, i'm retarded, if they reached SECO2 does this mean that they landed and then re launched the device? I don't understand what is happening

>>7908283
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIkPP2LM8DU

>>7908283

watch technical broadcast then, moron

>>7908283
nevermind i'm a faggot and didn't notice the second technical broadcast

>>7908283
Watch the technical webcast if you don't want the commentary.

DEPLOYING SOON

>>7908285
All 9 engines are needed for the launch.

>>7908289

no

>>7908299

then sorry i called you a moron earlier

>>7908296
Yes, the second stage turns on and off a few times to first circularize the orbit and then to boost the sat to a higher orbit

Payload separation confirmed!

B E A U T I F U L

Space sure is dusty.

>few months to reach orbit

Whoa whoa whoa niggress, you can't end it without telling us the fate of stage 1's landing

DONT. BLINK.

>>7908263
>snow in space
well they are ice crystals so you are not totally wrong

STAGE ONE DAMN IT

WHAT HAPPENED ELON

>>7908310
they have to very carefully move SES into its designated "slot" without fucking up the other dozens of satellites in GEO

>Don't blink

I think I just fell in love with a black lady

>completely ignoring the landing
they fucked it up

>>7908273
if you know you don't have enough fuel for your landing you will bring the first stage down anywhere but your expensive barge. If you know that you don't have enough fuel to slow it down sufficiently for a landing you don't slam it into the barge for no purpose at all, but into the ocean.

>>7908280
yeah, i know that, and it's pretty much the only reasonable explaination. All i'm saying is that the women saying that the rocket is coming in faster than at the successfull landing got nothing to do with the rocket hitting the barge to fast. The only explaination for that is either that it ran out of fuel or an engine failure.

>>7908311
IF they've ended the stream and haven't mentioned it on twitter I think it's safe to say it crashed.

>>7908310
fuck me, what? I missed that, is that for the satelite to reach apoapsis and circularize?

DON TO LEAVE US GANHING

>SpaceX launch ends
>Trump rally begins

What a time to be an American

it looked offcenter a split second before the stream cut
it's not looking good lads

STAGE ONE COVER UP

NOTHING TO SEE FOLKS

>>7908319
The barge is 2 inch thick steel

The first stage is made of light aluminum

It is designed to be smacked

Look at the other 3 barge failures - the barge just gets a new coat of paint

>>7908313
>>7908317
yeah, they made a Star Wars VII reference in a previous webcast. Gotta keep your geek cred on the interwebs!

REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>7908319
don't forget, that barge is fucking cheap
spacex is already making a profit on every launch and if they can get more data on how to make shit even more profitable they will throw out a 100k ship

it's pretty hard to test that landing phase and this is pretty much the only way to do it

>Secretly recover 1st stage
>Claim to use a new 1st stage in next mission
>Reveal it was actually a reused stage
>$$$

>>7908324
Slightly misleading as it's the employees of these companies not the companies themselves making the donations, but still.

>#Falcon9 booster did not survive landing, confirmed by #SpaceX. #SES9
https://twitter.com/MatthewBTravis/status/705908015711518720

drats

Someone get to the chopper and send me pics of landing plz

>>7908318
It's not like they're afraid of showing off their failures.

>>7908317
>>7908313
>>>/tv/
NuWho is shit faggots

>>7908317
What's this reference to?

>>7908310
>>7908322
~1.5 months if all goes well actually, due to the specific launch profile they chose. Which is also why they had to try the barge landing.

>>7908328
at the other 3 failures the rocket didn't slam into it without sufficiently slowing down, and all attempts had a chance of success. Why would you slam a rocket into it at relatively high speed without anything to gain from it?

>>7908334
Slightly? It's deliberately misleading.

>>7908334
>SpaceX
>mfw

>>7908336
Thread music
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrkzIN2eP0U

>>7908341
I'm going to guess weeping angels, might as well have yelled banzinga

>>7908332
What data do you gain by slamming the first stage into the barge without sufficiently slowing down? They thought their chances of success for the landing where >0%, otherwise they wouldn't have tried it.

>>7908346

>>7908334

musk confirmed on twitter that spacex does not donate to any political campaign

how long does it take (if at all) for the second stage to come down?

>>7908334
>Ralph Lauren
are they the fashion engineers in charge of his hairpiece?

>>7908341
>MUH PELTS

>>7908346
It's Space-X employees not Space-X. That group has taken the approach that since people who donated to them work at a company, they should take advantage of this and try and lead people to believe it's the companies themselves which donated.

>>7908336
They should just stop trying to land on the barge. It's clearly not working. Over dry land it went perfectly the first time they did it.

>>7908341
Doctor Who

>>7908343
>without anything to gain from it
D A T A
A
T
A
For example, improving the pinpointing of the landing location.
Also I'm sure they wouldn't have done it if they didn't at least know from simulations that it could work if all went correctly.

>>7908336
>source needed

I really just wish we could let the engineers loose at some point. We need to be less careful, remove red tape and let them do crazy shit. Like sending people (volunteers) into suicide missions.

I'm tired of all this focus on basic research, although detections at LIGO etc are cool and all.

>>7908353
Yeah, I know. There's literally a text in that post explaining that.

>>7908361
>Also I'm sure they wouldn't have done it if they didn't at least know from simulations that it could work if all went correctly.
That's all i'm saying mate.

>>7908360
The reason they're doing it is because if they can land the 1st stage on a barge at sea it drastically improves their options in terms of reusing the stage, as they have more options for where it lands. Don't forget that the ocean covers 70% of the planet. It's not like they're doing it for bragging rights anon

>>7908362
Isn't that guy the SpaceX photographer?

How long until news on first stage?
How long did it take after last crashes?

>>7908361
yeah, they're expanding the envelope of how much performance they can squeeze out of the launcher and still have enough for a landing. They came really close, apparently.

>>7908360
It's not always possible to do a full boost back. It takes a hell of a lot of fuel to change your trajectory by 180 degrees. Not to mention that for Vandenberg launches to polar orbits the rotation of the earth means that there isn't anywhere to land. Sometimes a Barge is the only option. I also think it's worth pointing out the these failures haven't been due to the barge but due to the rocket. They'd have also failed if they went for land.

>>7908352
you can test:
navigation
boostback timing
maneuverability
how well it compensates for wind

>>7908368
remember the first landing it ran out of hydraulic fluid
simulations are pretty shitty at predicting something as complex as this

>>7908365
>basic research
wut?

>>7908371
see
>>7908336

>>7908371
See >>7908336.

>>7908367
That text isn't emphasized though. It's deliberately misleading.

>>7908305
>>7908296
Ye, it landed first on the ISS and later on Hubble to rest a little before another run.

>>7908377
>Basic research, also called pure research or fundamental research, is scientific research aimed to improve scientific theories for improved understanding or prediction of natural or other phenomena.

e.g. people looking at the sky and analyzing data.

Engineers on the other hand DEVELOP instruments that are used for basic research and commercial use. We need to let engineers develop and test all kinds of crazy shit. SpaceX is a good start, but we need more.

Elon Musk @elonmusk 12s
Stg 1 landed harder than expected. Fate of ship unknown (transponder offline)

>>7908376
>you can test: [...]
You can test everything of that with the first stage without aiming for the barge but an imaginary target anywhere in the ocean though. No need to go for the barge if you know you can't slow down sufficiently.

>remember the first landing it ran out of hydraulic fluid
Yes, however you can't further test something like that if the landing got no chance of sucess anyways.

>>7908383
more like

"F 9"

"MISS!"

Next rocket flight when?
Next barge landing when?

>>7908383
2 SOON

>>7908386
Goofball

>>7908390
That's the old one

>>7908392
on the other hand...

>>7908388
"HIT! You sunk my autonomous barge!"

>>7908390
goddamn, this is so frustrating to watch

>>7908332
>don't forget, that barge is fucking cheap
It's not all THAT fucking cheap. Probably several million dollars at least, and possibly tens of millions.

It's a huge fucking seaworthy barge, with fancy shit on it for keeping it in place.

Rocketry isn't the only industry with big dollar figures involved. Ships aren't cheap.

>>7908399
fucking ice, a strip of insulation could have saved it

>>7908388
Did you make that up? I'm not seeing that on twitter. Give an actual link.

>>7908387
why_not_both.jpg

>>7908391
m8 what's your obsession with not using the barge? With the barge there, you even have some visuals of the situation and you actually know way easier whether or not you hit your target. And the barge is both pretty sturdy and can be easily replaced if it actually were to go down. And why do you think they couldn't slow down sufficiently?

>>7908401
The leg didn't lock into place, not ice.

>>7908391
again, the barge is cheap
it has cameras and telemetry
it's designed for hard landings and will simply require a new coat of paint

and it did have a chance of success, just a slim one

to put it more simply
if the variables(wind/thrust) had lined up it would have landed, it's method of compensating for those variables was tested and failed in a way that can be engineered for

>>7908406
Ice was the cause for the leg not locking. Source; Elon's twitter

>>7908391
And they've done that. Landing on the Barge is optimistic, but don;t you think that even a slim chance to get a good look at used first stage is worth trying?

>>7908388
fake.

>Stream ended with 34k km/h and 600 km altitude
>20 minutes later target altitude of 40,600 km achieved
wut

>>7908404
>And why do you think they couldn't slow down sufficiently?
I don't think that. All i'm saying is that they wouldn't have gone for the barge if they knew that they can't slow down sufficiently.

What about it?

>>7908414
probably the apogee

>>7908414
Yes, the rocket was at 600km now, it isn't at 40,000km yet (the target high point of the orbit)

Another failure, this is beginning to look more and more like false advertising designed to capture billions of taxpayer funds.

Anyone recorded the short clip from barge before it went offline?

>>7908425
just go back in the stream

why does musk go into Twitter hiding during these launches? anyone else think he's a world class beta?

>>7908415
Consider wording your posts better then, they look as if they were implying the opposite.

>>7908424
>for-profit private company
>taxpayer funds

>>7908425
Someone uploaded it on twitter. It must be on youtube by now

>>7908424
successful mission; yet another developmental failure an a previously untried engineering feat

Let's not forget how many failures everyone had at the beginning of the Space Race the last time we attempted new rocketry feats.

>>7908425
no but
https://youtu.be/sIkPP2LM8DU?t=27m35s

>>7908400
>It's not all THAT fucking cheap
spacex actually leases the barge and put their own engines and deck on it

>>7908436
LOL that wasn't even close

>>7908425
Not really worth to WEBM, there's pretty much one other frame with the light a bit higher up.

>>7908436
Thx man

>>7908356
Science homo thinks Trumps hair is fake

>>7908443

>>7908443
>>7908452
>SpaceX in charge of hitting a target

>>7908452
That's a pretty far stretch, even for /pol/.

>>7908437
>So what would you use this barge for, Mr Musk?
>Well, it's for, actually it's for our Falcon 9 rocket.
>Oh yeah, I read about that, you shipping it?
>Urrrm... Yeah, yeah, kind of.
>Kind of?
>Yeah, haha, don't know if you'll hang up on this like the last 3 barge firms but we'd actually like to try landing the rocket on it?
>...
>I'm so getting fired for this, but what the hell, go right ahead Sir.

>>7908452
at least flip the comic you twat

>>7908471
>ooooooooooh it was so close! I'll be praying for you Elon!

>Elon fanboys loving it

Failed again (didn't expect it to work). We'll try again text time, and it'll be a success for sure!

>>7908471
5m/s at landing is hard??
My kerbals survive that when landing on head.
Telemetry:
http://www.flightclub.io/results.php?id=9b8697ee-3cd2-40a4-8a1b-0f12a042a481&code=SES9

>>7908404
>why_not_both.jpg

I'm not saying we shouldn't invest in basic research, quite the contrary. But basically all space related R&D has been basic research recently, while development (engineering shit) has been on the backburner.

>>7908501
drive into a wall at almost 20km/h to find out. Yeah, it's hard. And an empty rocket stage isn't exactly what you'd call sturdy

>>7908424
You do realize that SpaceX is still successfully delivering satellites right?

Unlike other firms, their satellite launches also help in developing reusable stage1 rockets.

>>7908424
Yes, we should go back to Shuttle launches that are 100% government paid and cost 10 times more. Also killing humans along the way.

>>7908515
>Also killing humans along the way.
Isn't hard to find volunteers though. I'd take the chances

>>7908511
I wouldn't blow up at 20km/h.
Rocket needs shock absorbers. A system of nets could really help.

>>7908525
You'd hurt yourself pretty bad though.

shock absorbers are heavy, and nets will fuck the rocket up too. They are build as lightweight as possible, building them sturdy goes against their purpose.

>>7908525
>>7908547
Carbon nanotube factory when?

>>7908525
Once the first stage lands on the boat, poles should fold up from the sides and attempt to stabilize the top part of the rocket. They could form a cone shape around it, funneling it to stay in a standing position. Wonder if that would work.

checked out an article on yahoo talking about today's launch, and everybody is complaining and bitching, so I took a stand

did I do good guys?

>>7908755

>>7908699
The plan for a successful landing is for the crew of the tug that brings the drone ship into the landing zone to quickly board the drone ship and weld the landing legs onto the deck. The landing legs are more securely attached to the rocket than anything you'd be able to throw up while in the middle of the ocean so attaching the legs to the ship is the easiest approach to keeping the rocket in place while sailing home.

>>7908433
Well, he's not wrong on that one. Of all the money SpaceX took in the huge majority is from government contracts.

>>7908503
I want her to violate my anus with a strapon (if you know what I mean)

>>7907004
SUICIDE WATCH
U
I
C
I
D
E

W
A
T
C
H

>>7908503
Schrödinger's rocket

>>7909180
but then again, that goes for all launch providers.

is there a firm date on the next Dragon re-supply launch btw? I'm really hoping that Bigolow-module works out.