/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9784231
I can't wait for the ULA shill holocaust that will occur when this thing lifts off

>>9784231
God, imagine living in there for 3 years. Horrible.

I’ve always thought of BFR as BIG FUCKING ROCKET.

Also fuck. I can’t believe that people really are going to get sent to mars. It all feels so surreal.

>removable partitions allow for crew to bunk together and expand their private space if desired
There will be sex in space.

>>9785084

It won't be that long to cross to Mars. Maybe 3 months.

>>9784231

If you run around that ring shaped communal area you can generate your own gravity. Might be useful for exercise.

>>9785106

B"F"S is a fundamentally dishonest spacecraft design. Yes, it may get built and yes, it may go to Mars, but it will lack all authenticity and legitimacy.

>>9784231
buying parts now.

>>9785205
what the fuck does that even mean you doublethink fuck

(btw that OP image is just a fanciful imagination of what BFR's internal layout will be; it's not an official SpaceX anything)

>>9785205

What? Why?

WE MARS NAO

>>9785238
>>9785253

Expendable rockets + NTR are the only authentic way to get around the solar system. This whole system of chemical refueling is a cheat.

>>9785264
wew

>>9784231

I love how the life support system is just some random boxes.

>>9785261

>>9785264
but until then, BFR looks like it's gonna fly as a chemical rocket. what's your point

>"future spacecraft will make [BFR] look like a rowboat"
-Elon Musk

>>9785271
>>9785265

Only ULA and, to a lesser extent, Blue Origin, has the proven track record and connections to make space travel a reality.

>>9785287
0/10

>>9785287
nah

>>9785287
go to bed Bruno

>>9785194
skylab showed how that was possible. Still not as efficient as dedicated exercise gear however

>>9785298
Yeah but it means you can repurpose communal space for excercise rather than try to fit gym equipment for 100 people.

FATTIES NOT ALLOWED
http://www.the-aps.org/mm/hp/Audiences/Public-Press/2018/28.html

>The research team examined data collected by NASA from astronauts who had made long-duration space flights (averaging 165 days). The data included the astronauts’ sex and pre-flight height, weight, waist and chest size, as well as information about post-flight eye changes. The findings were related to body weight, not body mass index. They found that none of the female astronauts analyzed—who weighed less than the males—returned to Earth with symptoms of SANS. To rule out sex differences as a cause for the disparity, the researchers also examined the men’s data separately. “Pre-flight weight, waist circumference and chest circumference were all significantly greater in those who developed either disc edema or choroidal folds. This was still true when only the male cohort was analyzed,” the researchers wrote. “The results from this study show a strong relationship between body weight and the development of ocular changes in space.”

>SANS refers to structural changes in the eye that may impair vision, including swelling of the optic nerve (optic disc edema) and colored indentations (choroidal folds) in the blood vessel network at the back of the eye.

>>9785311
Haha Americans btfo

>>9785287

>>9785340

>Not putting the verb at the end

Amerikaner spion!

>>9785106
So far all humans have been born on this planet Earth. Soon people are gonna read this sentence in an archive and scoff at that. People are going to be born on mars. They will not have the choice. They may come out deformed due to the gravity difference, and they may wish to be born on earth instead. Really brings new questions of ethics into this whole thing.

>>9785352
what if humans on mars end up living to be 150? What if the gravity effects are positive? The ethics can be flipped.

>>9785358
Mars birthing vacations will be a thing

Someone has to send the methane plant to Mars first and get it ready. Which means a lot of BFR missions where the BFS will stay on Mars for good.

>>9784231
The animated timeline spaceX has on their website is really cool but also really fucking ambitious. Sometimes I wish I was born in 2030 so I can experience colonization of the solar system.

>>9785371
not necessarily. You can send payload-less BFR's to the surface and refill the manned ones with them to get enough dV to return to Earth.

Plus, one has to consider the power requirements for ISRU. Kilopower would be nice, but in reality it will probably be a couple BFR's filled with rolls of solar panels

>>9785372

I just hope my dad makes it long enough to see the first manned BFR landing on Mars. He was in his early 30s when they landed on the Moon and watched it live.

>>9785377
Here's to four more years of waiting. I'm hoping for the best with your dad. My grandpa was also 30 years around that time, and I hope he lives just a little longer to experience this.

>>9785372
Colonization isn't going to start till 2100 at the earliest. there is still so very much to do before we start trucking actual permanent residents to other planets.

this whole chemical rocket thing is analogous to the period of human flight before airplanes were invented and people were making due with zepplins, balloons, and gliders.

>>9785387
chemical rockets are here to stay. They'll get better and better, but they're not going anywhere

>>9785387
SpaceX fission rocket cycler.

>>9785387

chemical rockets are sufficient in inner solar system, one way travel times are on the order of months, not an actual issue

colonization of outer solar system would benefit from a nuclear or fusion drive, tough

>>9785392
i'm sure they will still find applications for them, but the heavy lifting is going to have to get done by something nuclear.

>>9785387
2100 is very pessimistic anon. I think we'll establish a permanent base around 2030 and have that develop into a full blown colony by 2050.

>>9785189
6

>>9785367
>newborns on a rocket
nowthatswhatIcalljellobabies.png

also, fetal development is a thing, they'd have to go back for the whole pregnancy, which defeats the purpose of a colony

>>9785404
Wtf no

>>9785311
fatties are usually stupid and lazy, unfit to handle space

with the recent announcement about methane on Mars it might be an interesting stop for BFR in the future

>>9785418
*methane on Pluto I meant

>>9785418
Pluto is excessively distant for a pitstop and exceedingly hostile to life. Titan would be far more accessible, with considerable hydrocarbon reserves.

>>9785427
what about the radiation in the Saturn system though? or is that Jupiter

>>9785387
>2100
are you a retard?
80 years is a long time you mouthbreathing fuckstick
World War 2 happened less than 80 years ago

>>9785387
>2100

Lmao yeah if ULA is in charge. If the launch costs of BFR reach what they claim then boom, everyone and their grandmother will be wanting to launch shit into space and BFR production will go through the roof when it costs the same as a 747. You have no idea the kind of boom it would be, especially asteroid captures for extremely expensive materials in large quantities.

can we speculate about New Armstrong for a bit? Do you think Bezoz will try and one-up Morsk with an even bigger penismobile or no?
BO is up to 1500 employees by the way.

>>9785430
You're thinking of Jupiter. Saturn does have the second most intense magnetosphere of any planet in the solar system, but Jupiter's intensity is unrivaled along with its mass among the planets.

wonder what species they will use to populate the grub farms on Mars

>>9785455
>wonder what species they will use to populate the grub farms on Mars
Literal grubs are a realistic option for protein requirements.

>>9785464
that's what I mean, what species of grubs.
or perhaps an isopod variant? They are extremely resultant creatures and can live without food for extended periods, among other advantages

>>9785455
>>9785464
Wrong. Fish will be an essential part of the hydroponic/aeroponic system to recycle nutrients. The size of the system will necessitate a shitload of fish, two good choices of fish for this process are Salmon and Trout

>tfw fresh Salmon and veg for dinner while peasant terrans eat factory processed slop

>>9785441
I think they will carry on with New Armstrong as planned to get a handle on what reusing a proper rocket requires, from there though I suspect he will absolutely try to one up on his BFR equivalent.

>>9785485
no no, NA is the BFR equivalent. You're thinking of New Glenn, the FH equivalent. New Shepard is the suborbital shitbox

>>9785485
>Wrong. Fish will be an essential part of the hydroponic/aeroponic system to recycle nutrients.

Fish aren't the only option for nitration of soil, and it's probably a good step too far for an un-established, small scale ecosystem. Farmed salmon are living in the same ecosystem as wild salmon, just in a pen that they can't escape from.

>>9785485
>>9785497
>>9785464
>>9785455
see: https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-food-022811-101222

>>9785490
Oh yeah you are totally right. I think New Armstrong will be about massive payload (200t+) to orbit for cheap and he will skip all the spaceship related bits. Bezos is all about orbital infrastructure.

>>9785497
The thing is though if we are talking about 100 people settling originally and 100s more coming every year they will need a huge hydro system right off the bat and if you are going to build that you should do it right.

>>9785506
Damn that's not a bad menu at all.

>>9785506

Sweet potatoes are gross. I'd rather stay on the Cursed Earth.

>>9785518
a well fed crew is a productive crew

>>9785485

By the time we get to Mars the settlers will be so used to boiled grub and isopod from living in the megacities of Earth, that they won't be able to stomach real food.

>>9785516
>The thing is though if we are talking about 100 people settling originally and 100s more coming every year they will need a huge hydro system right off the bat and if you are going to build that you should do it right.

I'm not saying I disagree, but that's an unsolved problem. It takes a huge amount of ocean to sustain multicellular organisms, and the bigger it gets, the more you need. Local food production is going to involve bootstrapping an entire ecosystem in an at least semi-controlled manner, and there's going to be a lot of weirdness from it being the first attempt at importing and constructing a biosphere from scratch.

>>9785529
don't forget the borloi

>>9785533
I'm more worried about gut fauna and other microbe stuff that we don't understand. We have like ten pounds of microbes in us, which are crucial to healthy living. Without knowing how to keep our microbiomes in top shape, a colony could easily fail

>>9785506
>Trout with mashed potatos and mushroom sauce
>Seared salmon on salad bed and new potatos
>Carrot, celery and potato soup
>Salmon sashimi with edamame beans and pickled radish

Tasty meals there desu.

>>9785506
>...The final consideration with respect to payload contribution is a preference toward multi-use equipment. The utility-knife premise is to supply a single piece of equipment that can perform multiple functions, either through specialized parts or accessories. Another option is to use equipment that shares a motor and/or shell, thereby saving the mass of a second motor or shell in payload.
Independent of payload considerations, essential equipment must be optimal for use and re- source utilization in a space habitat environment. As an example, a french fry cutter produces fantastically uniform french fries but weighs 16 pounds, and can easily be replaced in function with a knife and cutting board.

weird how we're going to Mars on these incredible, complex machines but then when we get there our cooking will be traditional. Might even need a dedicated cook!

>>9785522
Sweet potatoes also have the highest yields in calorie among all easily cultivated plants, with potatoes coming in at a distant second.

>>9785528

>Graham Cracker Cubes

These will be upgraded to dodecahedrons for the Mars missions.

>>9785506
>tofu texture was softer and less cohesive after being radiated
rip tofu shipments to mars

>>9785551
>rip tofu shipments to mars
Tofu's pretty bad for you, anyway.

>>9785551
>>9785552
I'm pretty sure cultivated meat will be ready for Mars, it's getting pretty close now.

>>9784821

I personally want to see Ariane crash and burn.

Their Chairman's complaining that re-usability means people can't be charged as much as they used to, the filthy kike.

another study: https://ac.els-cdn.com/S0273117702006592/1-s2.0-S0273117702006592-main.pdf?_tid=d3e4b594-bc81-4b6a-a988-9898ca05ed3f&acdnat=1527995290_b952f3ae421a45508aea39fc799a0b3a

discuss a Tilapia-rendalli/Wolffia arrhiza solution

>>9785546
but, one must consider the area per calorie and mass per calorie. see: pic

>>9785572
either way I don't think mars colonists will be eating slop. The diet will be quiet good more or less

>>9785556

Yep, in the form of autonomous bioreactors called chickens and to a less degree ducks. The best thing about this is that chickens will be able to fly on Mars in they live in a big enough dome, and this will blow their little chicken minds. I think they'll be a lot happier there than on Earth.

>>9785576
guinea pigs are actually the best meat candidate for mars

>>9785189

6-8 months is the average time to get to mars.

If the VASIMR thruster actually works and Elon can fit one with a nuclear reactor onto a BFR then travel time could potentially be reduced to 39 days. But I doubt a redesign would be possible and a new ship would have to be built.

>>9785587
The trip can be significantly shorter than six to eight months if they completely refill the main fuel tanks before Trans-Mars Injection, leaving the header tanks for Mars Entry-Descent-Landing burns.

>>9785578

But they're so furry. People won't be happy eating those. They'll rather go for soulless chickens at a slight cost of efficiency.

>>9785590
>>9785587
see: this very useful chart

>>9785587

You know you can actually refuel the tanks before heading to Mars. This isn't some boondoggle cold war expedition where you need to make it in a single launch and cross the void on nothing but fumes

>>9785576
Happy chicken frens :)

>>9785594
and this one (no free return)

>>9785587
elon said that for people it will only be the fast 3-5mo trajectory. cargo could take longer routes

>150t to titan in three years
oh baby

>>9784231
This shit is ridiculously impossible...

>>9785618
all you have to do is drive down to the San Pedro shipyard and hang around for an hour with a pair of binoculars and you'll believe it. They're constructing the CF mandrel, stockpiling raw materials, setting up tooling and configuring the temp factory floor in the big tent

>>9785620
What is the weight of this this thing, the planned design weigth?

>>9785627
85t dry mass.1,100t propellant. 150t max ascent payload

>>9785627
2.3x pressurized volume as Skylab

>>9784231
>A fucking drawing

>>9785587
>If the VASIMR thruster actually works and Elon can fit one with a nuclear reactor
I'm pretty sure solar cells offer more Watt/kg.

>>9785671
A drawing that will become reality within the next 4 years.

>>9785681
*1 year
Shotwell agrees that suborbital tests will begin late 2019. That will be BFB, but still

>>9785436

>Lmao yeah if ULA is in charge.
>I can't wait for the ULA shill holocaust

As someone closely following spaceflight for decades, it is ironic that ULA is considered the bad guy now. A decade ago ULA was the poster child of efficiency next to the complete clusterfuck that was the Shuttle and Constellation/SLS. Things are really improving recently..

>>9785689
The BFS is being built first, followed by the booster

>>9785697
ah, you're right, I had it flipped

>>9785189
3 years, in total because it's 1 year to get there and then back to Earth plus 2 years on Mars. I strongly suspect that the initial Mars crews will spend most of their time in the BFS while the permanent base is being built over the course of a decade.

>>9784231
>Every bedroom gets a window
why? that's dumb. Sure it'd be nice when it's actually on Mars but that window will feel really annoying when you're mid-transfer with either nothing to see, too much direct sunlight, and unnecessary radiation you could definitely do without.

>>9785741
it's a fanciful imagination of BFR, not exactly realistic

>>9785741
Yeah I doubt any windows will make it into the final design.

>>9784231

where is the solar storm shelter? should be in the central part of the ship, surrounded by supplies

>>9785760
oh, for sure there will be windows. just not that many of them

>>9785762
Just point the engines at the Sun.

Guys, I just had a thought.

If Martian ISRU uncovers thorium/uranium, SpaceX can make all the nuclear engines they want on Mars without ANYONE being able to tell them what to do

Holy shit

>>9785771

solar storms are less radially directional than you think

you will still need significant radiation protection from the sides and even front

>>9785778
have fun building a 3000t centrifuge facility

>>9785778
also, Canticle is an excellent book

>>9785786
Have link? Can't find.

>>9785788
your lack of googlefu disappoints me. Here, read it in large print as punishment https://7chan.org/lit/src/A_Canticle_for_Leibowitz_-_Walter_M__Miller,_Jr__4.pdf

>>9785760

All spaceships have had windows, and this one will be no exception. No one is going to tolerate relying entirely in instruments to see the outside world.

>>9785778

Impossible, the Test Ban Treaty applies in the entire solar system and indeed in the entire galaxy.

>>9785799
You're wrong, but they are under the jurisdiction of the Partial Test Ban Treaty. As an American Company, SpaceX is under the same rules of the treaty as the nation itself. The partial test ban treaty does nothing to prevent the utilization of nuclear engines in space. The treaty only limits the testing of weapons and the establishment of military bases on celestial bodies.

>>9785799
>the establishment of military bases on celestial bodies.

Interesting. So the SpaceX settlement will be completely defenseless... Ripe for the picking you might say.

>>9785811
space conflict is a meme. It will be at least 500 years before there is interplanetary violence

>>9785817

>t. ULA

Always trying to push back the deadline for progress. You're going to be left in the dust still struggling to build your expendable shitmobile while the battle of Elysium Planitia is taking place.

Do you think SpaceX will resurrect the MMU?
I'm not sure how they will manage to do spacewalks without one, since there's no canadarm and they can't have handrails bolted all over the ship.

>>9785855
magnetic boots? like in Destination Moon

>>9784231
retardation
any manned shit has always been stupid and nonrobust
just develop unmanned to the extent of high-autonomy, only use manned for safe transport and nothing more.

>>9785882
The skin of the BFS is carbon fiber and hence non-magnetic

>>9785889
why would they even need to do EVA's? only thing I can think of is check for MMOD damage. But that can be done with robots

>>9784821
ULA is safe because Boeing and LM, but Arianespace...

>>9785909
Arianespace is safe because Europe needs their own guaranteed access to space

>>9785918
The countries of Europe are not as loyal as you think. ArianeSpace is a project mainly pushed by the French, who like to have it around as a testbed for their solid booster ICBMs. Unless a law is instated that forces EU governments to launch with Ariane rockets - which is not going to happen - most countries will just jump ship to take advantage of the falling price. ESA and German space agency missions in particular.

What's the point to send people when you can send probes? For the money NASA will spend on one of those worthless toys we could have a dozen Opportunities and that's without international help. Did America learn nothing from the promises of the space shuttle?

>>9785927
>that forces EU governments to launch with Ariane rockets
That's actually likely, though I suspect bulk buy will be used first.

>>9785264
You sound like a very mentally ill person

>>9785387
This.
We've found logs float and brainless think humanity can cross the Atlantic with one.
That's not how it works.

>>9785264
>cheat
>NTR
hehe xD

>>9785205
>>9785264
>>9785287
>>9785387
>>9785415
>>9785618
>>9785671
>>9785886
>>9785928
>>9785936

>>9785673
Watt/kg, what are you a fucking cyclists, here you have to use N/kg

>>9785572

Looks like we're eating nothing but papayas.

>>9785947

Power for running the vasimir system you fucking chowderhead.

>>9785605
The wail of the planetary protection fags will deafen the seas once the realization sinks in. Make sure to wear ear plugs and avoid the rampaging green mobs.

>>9785558
He also complained that reusability would cause unemployment for rocket makers.

I'm no spaceship designer, but the lack of tremendous food, water, and oxygen reserves seems troubling, as do the presence of Windows for every room and a fuckhuge party den. This doesn't look very realistic. I should think there would be much more space devoted to necessities.

I would be extremely surprised to have a mars colony, or even a moon colony in the next 50 years. Delighted, but really shocked. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see it happening with the current technologies and costs.

>>9785890
I imagine they'll inevitably need to do one for repair/maintenance/inspection. They're going to be on year+ long trips.

>>9786417
Oxygen/water gets recycled. The only real finite supply they have is food, which doesn't take a ton of room when you dehydrate it. Plus they have a hydroponics farm onboard.

The drawing is low detail as well, so you can more easily make sense of it. IRL there will be lots more stuff making use of all the space.

>>9786674
and Irl they might launch two in tandem to mars as well

We've got a F9 launch early tomorrow
bread is up >>9786706

>>9785936
But the brave did cross oceans on logs, how do you think chickens got from south east Asia all the way to northwestern South America? We’ve been bravely riding logs since we saw logs float

>>9784231
>heat tiles
>expected to ablate (lose them)

LAUGHING GIRLS IN NASA UNIFORMS....

>>9784231

>hasn't launched a single human into orbit
>wants to send a 757-sized spaceship to Mars

>>9786928
and?

>>9784231
This is great but I dont see any radiation shielding

>>9786967
elon says that it's a meme. He says that in the grand scheme of mars exploration, a couple months of low radiation exposure is nothing compared to the overall risk of the mission. So, that mass is better spend on supplies and other stuff

>>9786928
they know that the single fucking moment they fail to launch a human to space and someone dies, their entire budget and support will go down the drain thanks to the MSM and currently Elon's reputation on twitter

so they're postponing it as much as they can and making every possible adjustment and safety measure because it's one single death that is going to kill their whole company and they know it.

>>9786977
its more complicated than that. With Dragon 2, sure, they're building in 40% safety margins and over designing everything, because that's what NASA requires for the CC program.

But BFR is on the fast-track, and from laying down the keel to flying people it will take half the time as D2 took

>>9786417
It's just some guy's picture. The real one will be way more packed with stuff.

>>9784231
>tower configuration
What did they mean by this?

>>9787012
yep

>>9785548

No, it must be O C T A H E D R O N

you are in charge of the media library for a mars mission. Your job is to fill up ten 100TB NimbusData Exadrives (1000 TB). What do you put on them?

>>9785782
lower gravity will make life easier

>>9784231
It's so curious sci fi writers talked about nuclear drives and weird technology and eventually the thing that is getting the job done is just a really really really well designed chemical rocket. absolutely weird.
>>9785084
orders of magnitude more comfortable than a submarine

>>9785189
it would be paradise, super comfy alone time watch all movies play guitar maybe paint, and thats being alone, if theres a girl on board we can fuck and cuddle in 0 g, shits cash

>>9785424
lol mars is about 5 times farther than the sun than earth, jupiter is 10 times... pluto is 40 FREACKING TIMES

>>9787337
>It's so curious sci fi writers talked about nuclear drives and weird technology and eventually the thing that is getting the job done is just a really really really well designed chemical rocket. absolutely weird.

Nobody else figured they'd send rockets up just to refuel the rocket that actually goes to Mars.

>>9787346
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17n9ynWx_04Tw5AZkgQoHItruoR1oAfhw3FkGOvtQlYk/edit#gid=928629824
go to the 'interplanetary' tab. It's not impossible, just inefficient. BFR as it stands is crap for deep space missions. I bet that we'll see a custom deep-space only BFR tug stage revealed pretty soon

>>9787360
BFR really isn't crap for interplanetary stuff. Compare it with other launch systems and you'll not find anything on the near term horizon that competes on time or payload. There's really no beating a big set of fuel tanks for this.

>>9785194
Wouldn't the rocket begin spinning?

>>9787370
Yes, but it would be a slow spin.

>>9785305
>100 people all trying to use 2-3 racks
dear god

>>9787379
at least you can't drop the weights hhueheueeue

>>9787337
nuclear rocket would be much better
it's simply that nuclear is a curse word and anyone in favour of it a monster that wants to kill the world with glowing green waste

>>9787381
SpaceX has shown interest in kilopower and nuclear propulsion. They've just not had the patience to go through the hoops to build a test stand for it.

Elon has said that if NASA helps with the red tape, they'll pursue nuclear rockets. But, as it stands with the requirements for a test stand scrubber etc there just is no incentive.

>>9785639
Skylab looked so rad compared to the shitty ISS interiors

>>9787387
>even if costs remained the same we would have been able to launch 3x the pressurized volume with Saturn V's than with shuttle/proton to construct the ISS for the same $
rip

>>9787026
What does thing even run on? Deuterium Tritium fusion? Just straight deuterium? Helium 3?

>>9787026
BFR is designed to spend a considerable amount of time landed, so vertically stacked decks is only logical.

>>9786972
KEK, THE ABSOLUTE MADMAN.
ANARCHO-SYNDICALIST IS GOING TO LAUNCH THE RICH INTO SPACE AND GIVE THEM CANCER.

>>9787409
the cancer risk is small anyways. you'll see headlines saying such things as "cancer risk doubles on trip to mars!" but that ignores the fact that it's a doubling of a very, very small number. It's all blown out of proportions

>>9785352
THERE'S ALWAYS ROOM FOR JELLO!

>>9787533
JELLO BABIES POSTER
I SUMMON THEE

>>9785436
>especially asteroid captures for extremely expensive materials in large quantities.

That's going to raise some interesting issues in terms of who do you trust holding all those rocks uphill from you.

>>9785562
Tilapia is trash, nutrition-wise.

>>9785786
Very much this.

>>9785811
Cue supervillain.

>>9786830

The Point
.
.
.
Your head

>>9787306
Porn
The "Alien" movies.

>>9784821
Can't wait until Vulcan, SLS, EUS, and ACES brutally btfo SpaceX to any medium and high energy trajectories.

>>9787368
With the proviso that t does not exist yet, and we are being told what they plan for it to be able to do. Lovely if it meets or exceeds all their targets -- but sometimes things don't.

>>9787370
Tomorrow, run the other way.

>>9787562
This is such a surreal post that I honestly believe you were paid to type it out

>>9787562
>that's a nice higher ISP you've got there
>it would be a shame if it was rendered useless by ten-times lower launch cost

>>9787605
Ten times? More like a hundred.

>>9785264

Nobody credible who came up with that same line or similar was serious about it.

Or what do you really mean with authenticity and legitimacy?

>>9785205
Yeah. It's very retro sf.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_p7LiyOUx0
Will videos like this be filmed by the crew of the BFS?

>>9787380
AFAIK wouldn't the weights have to be spring loaded?

>>9787341
That's if YOU owned the ship. They're gonna be under constant surveillance with strict excersise and sleep schedules and small rations until they get to mars.

>>9787383
The most interesting technology in my opinion is the hall effect thruster but it's so god damn weak that it can't lift off of earth (millinewtons of force here). If it's perfected or made more efficient, it's literally the plasma rocket that's in most sci-fi.

>>9787905
Uh, why not just use dozens of them?

>>9787916
>Uh, why not just use dozens of them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrust-to-weight_ratio
Because this number is way, way less than one for each engine.

>>9787903
arent all professional astronauts are?

>>9787964
Yes but the poster I'm replying to is presumably not on a mission (if he has enough time to fuck) and / or owns the ship which is highly unlikely and also highly illegal in most jurisdictions.

>>9787964
I think they have full privacy in their sleeping quarters.

>>9787980
On the ISS that is.

>>9784231
The whole concept is just retarded. You can't land such a big ship on Mars. They had like 10 failed tries with landing the much smaller Falcon 9 on landing pads on earth, and even to this day they still can't do it reliably. On Mars, you won't have landing pads and the landing manuveur is much harder there due to the thin atmosphere. What exactly is their plan, blow up BFSs on the surface of Mars until they nailed the landing? Each BFS will carry machinery and technology worth billions, or even tens of billions, blowing it up until they know to land in the thin atmosphere of Mars half-reliably is not really an option.

Also, the whole orbital refuel is kind of retarded, too. The crew will sit on the BFS for months, each time it is being refueled, biting their nails hoping nothing goes wrong and their existence won't end in a giant fireball in the sky.

Then there is also the fact that this thing is using HEATING TILES, the very thing that made the Space Shuttle the outrageously expensive, unsafe bullshit thing it was.

Also, thanks to the MSL, we know quite well how much radiation an Astronaut will get during the travel. For 6 months, it will be 0,8-0,9 Sievert. For a return trip, that's almost 2 Sievert of radiation dose, not yet including the the one you are going to get during your 2 years stay on Mars. If you count in that, too, you are pretty much over 5 Sievert, which is largely seen as a lethal dose and will kill you within months. This means, that without proper radiation shielding on Mars, the crew might not even come back alive, and if they do they most likely will die within 1 decade.

And Im not even going to go into the health hazards due to micro- and mars gravity.

The whole concept is just retarded, deep space missions aren't possible with a well-built-out infrastructure in near earth space, including artificial gravity space habitats and a lunar base.

>>9788009
*without a well-built-out infrastructure

>>9788009
You're pulling numbers out of your ass and are confusing single and lifetime doses.

>>9788022
https://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2013/may/HQ_13-165_MSL_Radiation_Findings.html

1,8 mSV * 180 = 324 mSV, and that is during a quite solar cycle, the associated papers all conclude that on an average cycle you will get at least twice that.

>>9787843
you don't get any space cred for going in reusable rockets

>>9788036
Hmm. That's more intense than I thought, and actually is significant. The lowest dose unambiguously associated with increased cancer likelihood is 100 mSV a year, and is twice the permitted annual radiation dose. It's not going to cause acute radiation sickness, but that is well into exposure hazard territory. The ship's polymer based body will actually help, since hydrogen is good at absorbing and dissipating radiation, but those high energy cosmic rays are nasty.

>>9788009
>>9788036
The bottom half of the ship will easily block a third of that, maybe more if the living quarters are designed to be as close to the bottom of the pressurized area as possible. Even then, the increase in cancer risk is comparable to having a smoking habit. Yeah, it might shave off 10 years of an astronauts lifespan, but who the hell cares? They get to go to fucking Mars.

>>9788155
The MSL had shielding, too, this is what it got through the shielding. And no, collecting >5 SV is not "comparable to a smoking habit", it is comparable to what the poor folks got who had to clean up Chernobyl.

>>9788155
>Yeah, it might shave off 10 years of an astronauts lifespan, but who the hell cares? They get to go to fucking Mars.

That might work for a small reseach outpost with only a few hundred people but if you want a fully fledged colony with millions of people? And btw, in a new Mars colony, it might not be a good idea to have whole your population have vastly increased chances of cancer. We can barely treat that shit on earth, let alone on a struggling new colony where they'll be dead weight

>>9788175
They won't be collecting ">5 Sievert". 6 months travel time (500 mSv max) and 2 years on Mars for another 500, maybe a thousand if shielding is shit. This figure can be made lower if the cargo bay and crew quarters are positioned cleverly.

>>9788155
>Yeah, it might shave off 10 years of an astronauts lifespan, but who the hell cares? They get to go to fucking Mars.
Wow.
Really?
Not: "They're the vanguard of humanity itself, flinging ourselves into the unknown void, no matter the cost?"
Instead, it's "Woo-hoo, I'm Buck-Fucking-Rodgers"???
That's just sad.

>>9785175
>There will be sex in space.
Has already happend, for scientific reasons.

>>9785383
please, at the current progress even then it will still take another decade before men walk on mars.

>>9785587
no nation will allow a nuclear powered rocket to lift of from earth.
if they ever want to do it then they will have to bring it up to space in parts and build it there.
something about the international space laws every nation has signed.

>>9788203
International laws are dead, no one gives a shit about them anymore. The only reason it can't be done (by western democracies) is internal backlash by environmentalists and lack of political good-will.

>>9788191
Contain your fun hating autism

>>9788195
NASA isn't the one planning it, it won't have the same quintupling of price and time

>>9784231
Talk about wasting space.

>>9784231
>Crew compartement on the outside
>water tanks not on the outside
>no radiation shelter at all
10/10 would arrive dead on mars with.

How does BFR land on Mars anyway without a pre-built landing pad.
If one foot lands on a rock, it'll just tip over

>>9790005
we have detailed surface maps with height data. Picking a landing spot is ez

>>9790009
Not really though, the atmosphere is thin but there is still wind, one small dust storm and your landing spot will look very different.

>>9790005
>If one foot lands on a rock, it'll just tip over

That'd have to be a really big rock. I doubt the SpaceX engineers are doing this without an unprepared landing site in mind for their leg design.

The whole thing is just a honey pot to gather investor money, none of it will actually happen.

>>9790018
the 6 gorrilion job openings and San Pedro progress beg to differ

>>9787353
>Nobody else figured they'd send rockets up just to refuel the rocket that actually goes to Mars.
But why? Are SciFi writers to blame for obscuring the simple yet neat solution?

>>9785404
brainlet

Friendly reminder that the SLS is required in order to build the Lunar Orbiting Platform-Gateway, because the Lunar Orbiting Platform-Gateway was designed to require SLS. Also it hasn't been designed yet, but when it is it will require SLS. Funding for designing it hasn't been allocated yet, but if and when it is, it will be on the basis that it require SLS. As you can see, SLS is clearly required by SLS requirements and Falcon Heavy is not SLS and so therefore does not meet the requirements of being SLS.

>>9790054
Yes. Because of them booster rockets and realistic delta v constraints became unappealing to normies. They all want Star Wars like ships (which will never ever exist), when chemical rockets are just fine for the inner solar system.

>>9790054
Because refueling a spaceship in Orbit 8 times is dangerous and retarded.

>>9787337
What job did this paper rocket get done exactly?

>>9785546
Aren't oily plants like avocadoes, cashews and coconuts much more calorie dense?

>>9790054
>But why? Are SciFi writers to blame for obscuring the simple yet neat solution?

The mass fractions and engineering just weren't there for re-using a VTVL rocket; back in the 60s through the 90s, the only reusable spacecraft people were willing to imagine were SSTO or TSTO spaceplanes that both had poor mass fractions.

>>9790081
>Aren't oily plants like avocadoes, cashews and coconuts much more calorie dense?

They are calorie dense, but they also take a lot of energy and resources to grow, which reduces their appeal.

>>9790082
Pic related, a picture from the 50s.

It is kind of obvious that you would first go with the easier horizonzal landing, since it's way easier, more reliable, and puts less stress on the vehicle, and it was done succesfully countless times.

Any attempt at landing was scrapped after that because it was found that the rockets come down in such a bad condition that re-use is not really possible, no matter how exactly you get them down. Bezos and Musk are trying again, but since the way of landing was not the issue I don't know what exactly they think they are achieving. SpaceX is already running into the same problems NASA did and so will Blue Origin.

>>9790091
Forgot the pic.

>>9790091
The Buck Rogers vision was seen as a much more advanced and unrealistically futuristic approach, and substantially predates successful orbital space flight. When they started getting the hang of it, the engineers realized that Buck Rogers style rockets were entirely out of their reach.

>>9790091
>Any attempt at landing was scrapped after that because it was found that the rockets come down in such a bad condition that re-use is not really possible, no matter how exactly you get them down.

This is incredibly disingenuous. The only attempts made at recovering a launched booster in one piece in an operational system were the Space Shuttle SRBs, which parachuted down, landed in the sea, and needed to be reworked, reshaped, and scraped down just to re-cast the solid rocket fuel mix.

> Bezos and Musk are trying again, but since the way of landing was not the issue I don't know what exactly they think they are achieving. SpaceX is already running into the same problems NASA did and so will Blue Origin.

Pic related. SpaceX is clearly getting the hang of engineering for the stresses of atmospheric reentry.

>>9790100
That aluminium grid fin really got toasted

>>9785556
>cultivated meat
>requires fetusses of the same animal to grow
I don‘t know who came up with that nonsense, but without being able to create stem cells in the lab it‘s a complete non-starter

>>9790127
Its still a lot less strenuous to pack fetal tissues in a cryo-bag than to carry and grow the whole animal.

>>9790100
The body of the space shuttles were in a much better shape than this, this is just the usual SpaceX bullshit PR I dont give a fuck about.

Just the engines of the Space Shuttle needed so much rework that any real re-using seemed completely hopeless.

As a little hint: If we can't even re-use the much easier to build solid boosters economically, we will absoluetely never re-use liquid ones.

>>9790100
Is that one on the right the block 5 after reflight? It looks it just came out of the factory wow.

>>9790165
SpaceX shills are out in full force today I see.

>>9790164
Thanks for your input ULA, your concerns have been noted.

>>9790167
Yeah bro totally shilling for SpaceX on 4chan so that all those multimillionaires will be swayed by a 4chan post.

>>9790164
>The body of the space shuttles were in a much better shape than this, this is just the usual SpaceX bullshit PR I dont give a fuck about.

Yes, the space shuttles were in much better shape than the booster on the left, and as for the booster on the right, that's just soot. A Space Shuttle never flew through its own exhaust plume. Pic related, space shuttle with TPS wear after normal flight ops.

>>9790165
>Is that one on the right the block 5 after reflight?
Its the first Block 5 after one launch and landing.

>>9790175
Everybody knows Elon's marketing philosophy is shilling on every major site in existence instead of paying for ads.

>>9790187
There are no Tesla shills for cars on /o/ or Tesla shills for energy products on /diy/ and yet he pays for loads of shills for the least publicly accessible company on the tiny board that is /sci/?

Cool fucking story bro needs more dragons.

>>9790164
Solid boosters were literally dropped into the ocean, fished out of the water and beaten back into shape. A Falcon 9 first stage just lands, gets checked for damage and then refilled.

>>9790196
Idk, the ULA shills seem pretty persistent

>>/sci/?task=search&ghost=&search_text=spacex+dishonest

>>9790245
ULA has a literally unlimited slush fund so why not blow 50m on "advertising" or whatever i guess.

>>9790239
Are you retarded?

>>9790024
the mad men are actually building it?
this isnt just a moneysink like nasa?

>>9788192
Gonna need source on this, with video preferably, for science reasons of course.

>>9790278
eh, i remember reading about it but now that i look it up i cant find it anywhere.

Maybe it was this that i read and took it as fact.
https://www.quora.com/Has-there-ever-been-a-case-of-astronauts-having-sex-in-space

Grasshopper hover and landing.
Grasshopper was a test vehicle used to develop vertical landing technology. In this test it performs a vertical takeoff, hover, and landing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orUjSkc2pG0
After 8 successful tests the Grasshopper was retired in lieu of the F9R Dev, built from a full-sized Falcon 9 first stage tank.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwwS4YOTbbw

Dragon capsule pad abort test.
A Dragon capsule (with attached trunk) uses its SuperDraco launch escape thrusters to test escaping from an emergency on the launchpad. There is an in-flight test of these thrusters planned for later this year, on the crew-ready Dragon 2.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_FXVjf46T8

First successful Falcon 9 landing.
After delivering Orbcomm OG-2 to orbit, the Falcon 9 first stage lands back at Cape Canaveral. This booster is now on display outside SpaceX headquarters in Hawthorne, California. And the crowd goes wild!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgaWHnY2Ph8

First successful ocean landing.
After delivering to orbit a Dragon supply capsule destined for the International Space Station, Falcon 9 lands on the barge Of Course I Still Love You in the Atlantic Ocean. This same booster was was the first to be reused, launching the communications satellite SES-10.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYmQQn_ZSys

Epic fails.
Proving that SpaceX is the only launch provider with a sense of humor, this video was allegedly edited together by the Muskrat himself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvim4rsNHkQ

Falcon Heavy.
The worlds most powerful operational rocket!?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKs84KjhBAM

ULA BTFO!
Orbital ATK on suicide watch!
Bezos pissing in a bottle!

Pic related, Elon's qt3.14 gf

>>9790306
SpaceX and Elon are cool but Grimes is shit and you and Elon both have shit taste. That motherfucker better have SpaceX bound up in 5 rooms of legal documents so some roastie doesn't walk out with a half share.

Whats the ETA for finishing that? 20 years? Im very hopeful

>>9790380
Testing begins in 2019. Finished in 2022 according to Musk, probably more like 2025.

>>9785347
Not him but I thought the verb always went in the second position unless it is a yes/no question in which case it would be put in the first position. (If this is in fact wrong blame my German professor, not me)

>>9790269
Glory to private business
If one doesn't give results, they die and get replaced by ones that do

>>9790387
I'd argue that we might keep the 2022 goal, maybe 23
There's a lot of money sitting on the fence, the faster he finishes, The faster he can dump tens of billions on Mars and every other plan he has

>>9787979
What are (((they))) gonna do? Fly to Mars and arrest him?

>>9790424
"Private business". BO is private, Elon is big gov's favorite pet. He got subsidies worth billions and know how worth tens of billions from NASA. And if NASA wants to pull the plug on Elon, they can do so in a heartbeat. The only legit private space enterprise out there is BO.

>>9790457
>>9790387
You deluded fanboys will be caught by reality fast enough.

BFR will NEVER fly. SpaceX will be bankrupt before they will finish it.

small spacex update from Musky
>extending the net area [of Mr Steven] by a factor of 4
it's already big, imagine something 4x that

>>9790495

>>9790512
This is not real, right?

The whole thing is overshooting our capabilities excessively. You don't just jump in to the deep like that, you need to work incrementally in steps. From LEO station to star trek colony ships? Please.
Call me when we build a station to test 1/3 G and its effects over more than an year.
Manned mission to Mars will require tremendous space infrastructure and you can't just wave that away by saying the space shuttle v2 will do it all.

>>9790559
No, they’ve had Mr Steven for a while now. So far they haven’t caught any, but they’ve gotten within 50m of the net through a combination of the parsasol control ability and ship maneuvering

>>9790562
Star Trek colony ship? Lol. This is a rowboat in comparison to what we’ll be building in 20 years. Anon, this IS the starting point

>>9785681
I'm not saying it definitely won't happen I'm saying that we are getting excited over a drawing. I will get excited when they at least build the thing.

>>9790567
A starting point will be ramping up the ISS research. Not wasting resources on hopeless designs.

>>9790562

Will you eat your own shit when this thing flies?

>>9785799
How the fuck is anyone ever going to find out you've been enriching uranium on Mars?

>>9790581
You’re a lost cause, aren’t you?
We should have had BFR size ships thirty years ago. And the ISS should have been phased out ten years ago.

Protip: reducing $/kg/leo is the most important aspect of space colonization. BFR does that.

>>9787337
Everyone in the 80s imagined hoverboards to be powered by antigravity but 21st century people are using minature propellers and high power density batteries

>>9790584
Of course not, He's a shill
He just wants to spam threads with nonsense

>>9790593
Pricetag to LEO is a small dent in the budget for space exploration. The hardware and all related costs are the limiting factor.
And the BFR sized ship was built 30 years ago, the STS. A design far more rooted in reality, that still failed spectacularly and nearly took down the entire us space program with it.
I don't see any indications for optimism.

>>9790620
2/10 troll attempt, honestly. Skirting the believability line that closely makes it obvious

>comparing STS and BFR
wew

>>9788203
Nah it's legal to build an NTR on the ground and launch it into space. It's just risky.

>>9790581
if the the BFR works they could put an entire station in space with a fraction of the cost of ISS and the same weight.

>>9790719
Yeah, passive nuclear is allowed.

What are they gonna name the colony

>>9790864
white haven.

>>9790864
E5M1

>>9790410
Sentence is fine, if a bit unnatural and clunky in terms of word choice. Oh and Schnappen is obviously not used for that sound.

>>9785404
2100 is not pessimistic rather it's optimistic

>>9787404
"fusion" (i.e. SciFi magic)

>>9791161

>>9784231
big meme rocket will never be produced

>>9785411
that's why we need a stanford torus first.

to analyze the effects of fractional gravity on human reproduction. see if it's even possible to do.

>>9785572
>>9785574
do they do calculations for other plants used in cooking? seasoning and the like?

>>9791234
seasonings are the sorts of things you just bring two gallons of and call it a day.

Hey /sci/ is it even possible for us to become a space-faring civilization?

It seems really difficult given the constraints of physics and a whole bunch of other things, but is there any hope for us?

Thanks for reading /sci/

>>9791161
82 years ago the first beetle rolled out of the factory.
think about what we will do in the next 82 years.

>>9790269
It's anticipated to be ready for suborbital tests as soon as next year.

>>9790864
New Arizona

>>9791402
Even when they finish that monster next year, the red tape alone will keep in grounded for years.
And with that i mean politics.

>>9784231
>we will have actual spaceships soon
wake me up when it isnt just a privatization of the public's space program so that rich people can take more tax money.

>>9791518
what politics? the only governing body regarding spaceflight is the FAA. You file for a launch permit, and then it gets approved. SpaceX has a great relation with the FAA.

>>9791525
who's to say that there must be a "public" space program? Sounds awfully socialist to me. Privately funded, privately operated companies landing on Mars first is the most American outcome there is.

>>9791531
>Sounds awfully socialist to me

>>9791526
i mean that if that monster takes of and it turns out that it works that a whole lot of people in the business will look stupid and will have to explain themselves about why they are burning trough taxpayer money.
I'm not only talking about the US, the russians and their "old&trusty" rockets would be out of business too.

>>9791540
I honestly don't really know how to respond to this. Why are you assuming the "money axis" will be the same for both" why are you assuming that profit will be a component of the private bar? what the fuck does your pic even try to explain? Why do you have a 2nd grader understanding of economics?

I have so many questions.

>>9791546
>avalanche of bullshit

>>9791544
countries will always want domestic space capabilities. China is working on reusable rockets, and Russia is. Being 10 years late to the newspace game still means that in the end you have the same rough capabilities. Sure, short-term the commercial market will feel the squeeze, but leaders will see the disadvantage of not being able to built fucking humongous orbital platforms and asteroid mining for pennies and also commit to BFR style rockets.

There is always room for more than one comparable rocket in the 'market'. BFR won't be the only BFR-class vehicle in 15 years

>>9791553
oh, you're just a troll. That does explain a lot

>>9791554
i like your optimism and agree with your logic but i still see US politicians fighting hard for keeping the funding of their states space program afloat until at least the next election.

>>9791573
Trump watched the Falcon Heavy launch and in typical fashion he blurted out "NASA is working on one just like it, it costs 80 times as much"

He clearly approves of what SpaceX is doing

>>9791558

>>9791583
I'm literally not even going to read what those labels are because of that font, good lord. Not like they would make sense to begin with

>>9791590
>profits = 'free money'
yep he's a socialist
>>>/lit/ is that way

>>9791581
Yeah, but if trump had his way then right now he would be finishing up his term while swiming in pootang and the us would have returned all its IP's who went overseas for manufacturing.

>>9791593
meant to reply to >>9791583

>>9791590
>>9791593
you do understand that a % of the tax money given to for profit companies is cut off the top as profits right? I know the propaganda pushes the "evil" of public works really hard but you can still see through the bullshit to at least some extent right?

>>9791600
no shit moron.
>government pays SpaceX to launch a payload
>SpaceX makes a profit
o i am laffin

we're in bumpland, should I make a new BFR thread?

>>9791628
Yeah, sure, but the next one will go cold fast.

>>9790013
You'd be surpised lol.

>>9788191
can you jerk yourself off somewhere else, you're very distracting.

>>9790497
You deluded fanboys will be caught by reality fast enough.

Falcon Heavy will NEVER fly. SpaceX will be bankrupt before they will finish it.

>>9790864
Bogdangrad