/sg/ Space/Spaceflight General

File: 215 KB, 512x512, Rocket_town_rocket2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

/sg/ Space/Spaceflight General Anonymous Tue Apr 2 04:26:56 2019 No.10516182 [Reply] [Original]

SLS is not dead edition

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:00:31 2019 No.10516266
File: 145 KB, 1125x1453, expendable launch vehicle.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

This is a travesty<div class="like-perk-cnt"><marquee direction="left" width="250" height="50" behavior="alternate"><marquee direction="down" height="50" behavior="alternate">⚾</marquee></marquee></div>

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:01:31 2019 No.10516267 File: 326 KB, 2518x1024, muskchad.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:05:13 2019 No.10516269 >>10516182 Previous thread >>10509231

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:12:43 2019 No.10516277 >>10516266 I thought the FH being able to put 60 tons into LEO was kind of a lie.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:16:03 2019 No.10516282 >>10516277 Can the current payload adapter/second stage even handle the weight?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:26:36 2019 No.10516291 For those who haven't watched it, there's a new video with Big Jim addressing space debris, Moon mission, Orion and more https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2gz2E-Wrws

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:38:55 2019 No.10516296 >>10516282 No, but only because designing it to be able to would be overkill for 99% of existing payloads, and would thus make the adapter way heavier than it'd need to be under normal circumstances. The cores can take the thrust loads.

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:40:27 2019 No.10516297

>>10516277
It has the thrust and the delta V, what it needs is a stronger payload adapter, but that's literally just a case of thickening the metal it's made from. the reason they haven't yet is because there aren't any payloads heavy enough to justify the expense.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:46:01 2019 No.10516305 >>10516266 can this put Orion to lunar orbit or just a flyby

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:47:03 2019 No.10516306 >>10516266 whats with the bouncing ball_?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:49:57 2019 No.10516311 >>10516306 >he hasn't a verified 4chan account<div class="like-perk-cnt"><div style="text-align:right"><img alt="" width="32" height="32" src="//s.4cdn.org/image/temp/verified.png"></div></div>

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:52:43 2019 No.10516313 >>10516311 what a cuck. pic related<div class="like-perk-cnt"><img alt="" width="77" height="13" src="//s.4cdn.org/image/nofile.png"></div>

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 06:53:27 2019 No.10516315 File: 488 KB, 960x726, 1553678087174.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10516311 >Paying to shitpost Wew lad

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:06:57 2019 No.10516329

>>10516266
It honestly doesn't look half bad, in fact I like it just for the fact that it demonstrates how don't need 'muh amazing hydrogen Isp giant tank RS-25 engines' to get a payload like Orion to the Moon, you can do it with engines literally 1/3rd less efficient and a smaller rocket overall.

Too bad this entire idea is not serious, and only meant to be a shot across the bow for the people in charge of SLS in order to try to get them to wake up and get their shit together.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:08:08 2019 No.10516332 >>10516305 Lunar orbit, the Falcon Heavy would drop off the Orion capsule + ICPS in low Earth orbit at the same altitude and speed that SLS would. From there the mission is identical.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:14:41 2019 No.10516339 >>10516332 Why not use the Dragon Crew instead?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:16:36 2019 No.10516344 >>10516339 dragon can't go as far as the moon right?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:23:58 2019 No.10516353 >>10516332 >at the same altitude and speed that SLS would remind me why do we need SLS again?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:26:28 2019 No.10516355 >>10516353 >remind me why do we need SLS again? That's the secret, Anon. There isn't anything being made that we need SLS for.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:27:38 2019 No.10516357 >>10516266 Ah, this is fully expendable. Now I can sort of understand. Was really confused at first.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:32:07 2019 No.10516362 >>10516353 But anon don't you care about muh jerbs, what if we ever need to build another 5000 ICBMS at a moment's notice?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:33:59 2019 No.10516364 >>10516266 L O N G B O I

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:34:33 2019 No.10516365 File: 24 KB, 285x368, 1524642836097.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10516266 franken-rocket

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:44:27 2019 No.10516377 >>10516266 So assuming they are not just talking out of their ass to scare NASA, how long could it take to get this ready?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:47:04 2019 No.10516380 >>10516377 SpaceX could have their part and the payload adaptor ready in a matter of months likely. The other parts? That's ULA and NASA time buddy, so like, years?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 07:53:29 2019 No.10516385 File: 1.90 MB, 316x213, 1406615983613.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10516266 >well we could spend dozens of billions of dollars to build our own rocket over the next 5 years >or we could just pay these guys to launch it next month

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 08:14:56 2019 No.10516400

>>10516297
This is assuming that Falcon 9 specifications are correct, which they aren't. For some reason SpaceX is overstating its capabilities, or maybe giving the capabilities it can do in some perfect-condition computer simulation. In reality, F9 expendable can't do 23 tons to LEO and FH can't do 64. More realistic numbers are 19-20 for F9 and 50-55 for FH.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 08:28:33 2019 No.10516411 >>10516297 Yeah, but as far as I know one single Merlin 9 doesn't have enough thrust to push that much payload plus the fuel of the second stage. IIRC the payload restriction is something like 30 tons or so.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 10:00:39 2019 No.10516530 >>10516266 as long as it gets us to the moon I don't give a fuck. It could look like a big purple dragon dildo for all I care. Let's not forget that the SLS is basically made from shuttle parts.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 10:00:57 2019 No.10516531 File: 1.64 MB, 400x400, 1553875802596.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] BOOTS ON THE MOON 2024

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 10:09:47 2019 No.10516538 >>10516531 LETS FUCKING GOOOOO

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 10:14:46 2019 No.10516545 >>10516531 Finaly! Some progress! Lets hope that it doesn't get pushed back to 2042 to appease contractors.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 10:22:23 2019 No.10516549 File: 197 KB, 650x684, boot-altama-305302-men-s-vengeance-sr-8in-lightweight-side-zip-desert-tan-1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10516545 It's going to be a cargo mission. Boots, one pair, delivered!

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 10:32:12 2019 No.10516568

>>10516549
In which NASA gets strong-armed by congress to contract Boeing in making a special cargo adapter for the boots. This somehow takes 3 years and $30M to develop. Each unit costs $3M and requires a specialist to attach the boots into. When literally anyone but Boeing were asked how they would do it, they just suggested using ropes.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 10:53:52 2019 No.10516612 >>10516400 Source?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 10:55:54 2019 No.10516615 >>10516400 The desire for sources intensifies

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 10:58:12 2019 No.10516622
File: 1.68 MB, 1280x720, [HorribleSubs] Love Live! Sunshine!! S2 - 04 [720p].mkv_snapshot_01.44_[2017.10.29_02.52.02].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10516182
>Starship
>NASA going back to the Moon
>JWST
>EU Extra Large Telescope
>Chinks want moon bases
>Indians getting in the race

I want to sleep for 5 years to see what comes out of this.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 11:01:18 2019 No.10516629 File: 3.07 MB, 5067x3801, IMG_7182 (2).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Pics from the launch site this morning. -NSF

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 11:04:24 2019 No.10516634 >>10516530

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 11:25:15 2019 No.10516675

>>10516612
>>10516615
http://www.spaceflightfans.cn/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/falconusersguide2019.pdf

Now see what you CAN NOT find and ask yourself why.

Also, there was a launch last year where they first planned to do a drone ship landing and then scrapped it although the payload was so lightweight it should have left them more than enough Delta-V for a drone ship landing if those specifications were actually right; assume though they are actually a bit lower than that and you could see why they had double-thoughts about it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 11:35:28 2019 No.10516687 >>10516675 Your conspiracy is based on this??? >>Mass-to-orbit capabilities for the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy fairing configuration are available upon request.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 11:39:39 2019 No.10516696 >>10516687 You left out the second part idiot. Also yes, not giving any mass capability at all is strange.

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 11:45:12 2019 No.10516704

>>10516675
>Also, there was a launch last year where they first planned to do a drone ship landing and then scrapped it although the payload was so lightweight it should have left them more than enough Delta-V for a drone ship landing if those specifications were actually right
Which launch are you talking about specifically?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 11:47:21 2019 No.10516705 File: 183 KB, 640x960, f798465498dfeFGG6879.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 11:51:27 2019 No.10516717 >>10516704 https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/03/spacex-50-falcon-9-heavy-hispasat-launch/

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 11:54:46 2019 No.10516722

>>10516717
A drone ship landing was planned, but scrapped due to unfavorable weather conditions.[270] SpaceX left the landing legs and titanium grid fins in place to prevent further delays, after previous concerns with the fairing pressurization and conflicts with the launch of GOES-S.[272]

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 11:58:49 2019 No.10516732

>>10516717
Thank you.

>The company’s recovery fleet, including the drone ship Of Course I Still Love You, put to sea on 21 February to support what would, if it had been attempted, have been SpaceX’s most ambitious core recovery attempt to date.
I don't have the time right now to look into this but it seems like there were factors in that launch that made recovery difficult and not due to some limitation in the design.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:01:12 2019 No.10516739 >>10516717 >>As weather conditions at sea have prevented recovery operations from taking place, the core was instead disposed of into the ocean Dont make me look at weather reports for that time.....

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:02:43 2019 No.10516743 >>10516722 You've also got to consider this was during the phase when SpaceX were purposefully dumping Block 4 boosters.

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:13:21 2019 No.10516765

>>10516704
I don't know, but there are many such flight. Theoretically, SpaceX should be able to land GTO missions up to ~7 tons on a drone ship, but those dont get a landing attemt at all. It should also be able to put ~5 tons into GTO and RTLS but those get landed on a drone ship. Add to this the fact the user manual is secretive about capabilities and you get the picture why a lot of people think SpaceX is overstating the capabilities of the F9.

>>10516687
You know, if they want you to just call them they could have avoided publishing a user guide altogether. Leaving out typical mass capabalities is weird as fuck, like a car manufacturer not telling you how much gas the car typically consumes.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:23:17 2019 No.10516792 >>10516629 This doesn't look very mobile

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:28:35 2019 No.10516804 File: 73 KB, 1172x274, em.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] ice a shit

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:31:43 2019 No.10516811 >>10516804 >>SPACE X is DED !!!! Pack your bags and go home. The show is over

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:40:24 2019 No.10516827 >>10516804 >not heating the valves with Boring Company TM flamethrowers wew lad

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:41:38 2019 No.10516830 >>10516266 Looks like it can snap in half easily. t. layman

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:44:07 2019 No.10516832 >>10516830 I played enough Kerbal Space Program with FAR to know that it's impossible to get that thing into orbit without doing a couple backflips on the way up.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:45:00 2019 No.10516835 File: 181 KB, 1271x933, IMG_0296.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10516792

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:54:14 2019 No.10516855
File: 368 KB, 2817x1574, Commonality_DIRECT.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10516530
>SLS is basically made from shuttle parts.
they didn't even do it the right way as intended by the engineers, NASA workers, etc who came up with DIRECT, instead they did it so SLS could become a pork barrel project sustaining jobs/elections/congressmen, etc..

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 12:57:55 2019 No.10516860 File: 2.75 MB, 960x540, 1552509798321.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10516855

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 13:14:30 2019 No.10516883 >>10516855 At least SLS is starting to get some real scrutiny from the government now. Hopefully it flies some real missions to the moon before other super heavy rockets fly.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 13:17:11 2019 No.10516885 >>10516860 I like to imagine the shuttle gets thrown into a waste paper basket when it goes off screen.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 13:21:55 2019 No.10516897 >>10516266 SpaceX decided not to human rate the FH. Who's going to buy the 7 launches needed? This is a Kerbal tier hodge podge and could destroy the rocket/take too long to adapt the SLS third stage to fit the FH

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 13:26:02 2019 No.10516905 >>10516266 Falcon is too skinny. Why can't SpaceX at least make a wider core stage? A wider stage might even be easier to land.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 13:29:46 2019 No.10516911 >>10516629 Wasn't this supposed to have 3 Raptors?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 13:32:52 2019 No.10516917 >>10516911 iirc the second hopper will have 3

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 13:34:36 2019 No.10516919

>>10516905
I think Falcon 9 is skinny because originally it was meant to be a smaller rocket (the Falcon 5). But then SpaceX got more funding from NASA to make a bigger launcher so they took the design they had, added more engines to the first stage, and stretched the rocket until it had the capability they needed.

As to why SpaceX isn't making a wider Falcon 9 is probably due to two things mainly. One, NASA requires a design freeze for any rocket that carries crew for them, so if SpaceX made the Faclon wider then they would have to reproof it for crew. That process takes a while. Two, SpaceX already has the production line, tooling, and expertise for the regular Falcon 9 available and it's already making them money. Changing the design to be wider would mean more expenses on SpaceX for a slightly better rocket (from their perspective at least). You can see how it's not worth it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 13:36:32 2019 No.10516924 >>10516919 Neither of your reasons are the actual reason. Falcon 9 is sized for road transport. It can't be made wider before it stops being legal to transport on the Interstate Highway System. A shorter, wider rocket would otherwise be preferable.

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 13:36:41 2019 No.10516925

>>10516911
pretty sure they haven't even finished building the other two raptor engines. They were supposed to do various single engine tests while waiting for the other two to show up, then once those were there and bolted on it'd actually start doing the hopping.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 13:55:46 2019 No.10516948 >>10516924 I was not aware of this. Is there documentation about that?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:14:25 2019 No.10516991 >>10516948 have you ever seen one of them on a truck? it barely fits other than that, no I don't have papers but that other anon might`

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:22:20 2019 No.10517004
File: 567 KB, 3264x2448, WkGqHru.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10516948
A Falcon 9 has a diameter of 12'. The legal limit to trucking in the Eastern United States is 13' 6" for the total height of the trailer and load.

https://www.heavyhaul.net/trucking-legal-height-limits-map/

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:25:08 2019 No.10517013 >>10516924 How would they have to transport it instead if it was wider, how do the wider rocket companies do it?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:26:53 2019 No.10517018 >>10517004 Thank you! Its always interesting to see the rationale behind these designs.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:29:30 2019 No.10517024 >>10517013 >How would they have to transport it instead if it was wider, how do the wider rocket companies do it? Other rockets have been built on site, flown in cargo planes, or transported on barges.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:30:22 2019 No.10517025 >>10517013 Seaways.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:31:01 2019 No.10517031 >>10517024 >>10517025 why not train

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:32:17 2019 No.10517037 >>10517031 just use a blimp train

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:33:02 2019 No.10517039 >>10517037 what about a large cannon that fires rockets across state to their designated launchpads?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:33:32 2019 No.10517041 >>10516835 Oh yea? And where is the engine with all the piping that grounds this beast?

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:37:45 2019 No.10517050

>>10517039
just fucking fill them up and fly them wherever you need them to be
the droneship landings are like 1000 km out aren't they? Plenty of distance for a core to transport itself
>>10517041
all the piping is self-contained
I haven't seen them install quick-release on the fill-hoses yet tho
it's kind of a moot point because the whole thing's tied down right now

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 14:37:50 2019 No.10517051 >>10517004 Haha imagine igniting the rocket while it was on the back of the truck haha would that be cool? A rocket truck lol

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 15:04:01 2019 No.10517101 >>10517004 Thanks, very interesting to see how the law limits engineering decisions in completely unrelated things, ie. rockets

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 15:05:52 2019 No.10517105 >>10517051 New land speed record!

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 15:08:07 2019 No.10517110

>>10517101
>Thanks, very interesting to see how the law limits engineering decisions in completely unrelated things, ie. rockets

You're welcome - although to be fair, it was SpaceX's decision to rely on the Interstate Highway System to move their rockets.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 15:17:51 2019 No.10517134 fun fact, Boeing's -900 etc fuselages are length they are because of... tunnels if they were any longer they'd hit the inside of the train tunnels when they curve

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 15:22:00 2019 No.10517143 >>10517051 this is how you build up extra horizontal velocity

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 15:26:19 2019 No.10517150 File: 168 KB, 1200x800, 140706-boeing-fuselages-jms-1758_d1e183a8786b78378a2615205f45f508.nbcnews-fp-1200-800.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10517134 boeing transports fuselages by train and sometimes they get thirsty

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 15:43:26 2019 No.10517198 >>10517150 those people are getting too close to those eels

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 15:51:32 2019 No.10517215 >>10517198 That pic is from "Boeinssic park" trailer

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 16:01:49 2019 No.10517231 >>10517150 >>10517198 Jesus Christ these MCAS accidents are getting out of hand

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 16:07:37 2019 No.10517238 Two Soyuz launches on April 4. Can Russia accomplish it?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 16:08:43 2019 No.10517241 SpaceX should just start building its rockets near the place where it's going to launch them. How hard could it be?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 16:14:30 2019 No.10517249 >>10517238 Russia's only launching one Soyuz on April 4

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 16:16:24 2019 No.10517256 >>10517238 Baikonur and vostochny? Impressive...

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 16:17:33 2019 No.10517258 >>10517256 Baikonur and Guiana but both rockets are Russian

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 16:35:06 2019 No.10517281 >>10517150 >Ethiopian Airlines Simulator 2019

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 16:35:27 2019 No.10517282 >>10516182 by travesty you mean proof of adapting, creativity, and a feat of engineering? Yes. They took a crappy situation and are open and flexible to make changes mid stride.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 17:46:54 2019 No.10517443 >>10516717 Was a block 4 booster, not block 5

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 17:50:06 2019 No.10517447 https://youtu.be/hHG3Z0O9Xzo A cool animation of Sea Dragon that I've found. Thought that you guys might like it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 17:51:12 2019 No.10517449 File: 432 KB, 2048x1536, D3JqJyxWAAUoW56.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:14:54 2019 No.10517502 >>10517258 >Guiana So it not Russian. Guiana operated by ESA, so it european rocket.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:16:01 2019 No.10517509 >>10517502 Roscosmos operates the Soyuz it sells to Arianespace

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:24:20 2019 No.10517523 >>10517051 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JENG0Z8AMk

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:27:31 2019 No.10517531 >>10516629 Wasn't this bastard supposed to have hopped yesterday?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:28:34 2019 No.10517533 >>10517531 valves are freezing t. musk

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:30:17 2019 No.10517537 >>10517502 >european rocket ruski rocket with commercial payload

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:31:39 2019 No.10517541

>>10517502
I wasn't asking if Russia could handle two launches from its own territory. I was asking if these two Soyuz rockets can make it into space without any problems. Soyuz reliability is becoming very questionable. Two Soyuz launched on the same day means there is more chance for something to go wrong in that time period.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:32:01 2019 No.10517543 >>10516855 It occurred to me - Why not keep the exact same stack but instead of the shuttle you have an expendable faired engine, and stick the payload on the top?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:34:21 2019 No.10517547 >>10516860 Yeah why didn't they do this

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:36:49 2019 No.10517550 >>10517543 Don't you mean Shuttle-C? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle-C

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:40:39 2019 No.10517560 >>10517541 OK so who do you congratulate for a successful mission of Dragon2 ? SpaceX that build it or NASA that payed for the mission ? Guess who the russians thanked.....

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:42:23 2019 No.10517563 >>10516860 what KSP mod is this?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:45:57 2019 No.10517572 >>10517533 Ech, 'kin ell. My mars away bag is packed

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 18:49:30 2019 No.10517586 >>10517550 Almost, but with payload on the top. Hey ho. How the fuck did NASA fuck things up so badly for so long?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 19:55:59 2019 No.10517752 >>10516400 >and 50-55 for FH. Still good enough to launch the entire Orion + service module + ICPS into low Earth orbit as-is.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 19:59:40 2019 No.10517763 >>10516832 If your rockets are doing backflips it's because you're a faggot

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:01:03 2019 No.10517767 >>10516905 >Why can't SpaceX at least make a wider core stage? Tooling costs and they wouldn't be able to transport it by highway anymore.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:04:43 2019 No.10517777 >>10517050 usually they're only a couple hundred km out, i don't think they've ever put a drone ship out past 800 km.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:09:15 2019 No.10517783 >>10517447 >humans on Sea Dragon Meh, it was nice until the animator went full retard with that staging sequence and never recovered

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:12:30 2019 No.10517795

>>10517586
>Almost, but with payload on the top.
Because the tank wasn't originally designed to take the loads that would result from attaching dozens of tons of cargo to its nose. Any design you hear about that had the payload on the nose but didn't completely redesign the tank would have failed; that includes the Jupiter design. The only Shuttle derived vehicle that would have actually worked with zero changes to the boosters and external tank was the one where the main engines were mounted on the side as if there were a Shuttle, but instead of a shuttle there was just a big fairing mounted to the engine block.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:13:47 2019 No.10517799 File: 95 KB, 1068x691, D3KwHs7XsAIgljA.jpg orig.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] thanks scott

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:23:17 2019 No.10517814

>>10517101
this same problem affects Russian rail transport of their rockets. It is one reason nobody wants to build more Proton pads. The existing lines between the factory and Baikonur are already much wider and have more headroom than are standard.

This is also why Soyuz launches from so many places; it breaks down into many narrow parts so it is easy to transport.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:24:20 2019 No.10517819 >>10517777 this Falcon Heavy flight is going to have it at 967 km

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:27:30 2019 No.10517829 >>10517819 It's also the furthest one ever

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:50:41 2019 No.10517881 Hopper is venting again

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:50:43 2019 No.10517882 >>10517150 They're so majestic in the wild.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 20:58:20 2019 No.10517911 >>10517829 yes, I'm sure they could launch from LA to the Cape, point to point single stage and land >>10517881 looks like they've really got it lit up out there

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:02:22 2019 No.10517929 QUICK ASSUMING YOU HAD THE FUNDING TO BUILD IT, HOW FAST COULD A ROCKET MADE WITH THE PEAK OF TODAY'S TECHNOLOGY TRAVEL THE MOON? HOW FAST COULD IT TRAVEL TO MARS?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:05:46 2019 No.10517935 >>10517799 >Untitled Space Craft heh

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:06:05 2019 No.10517936
File: 161 KB, 700x436, musky boi.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>Despite contrary comments made one week prior, NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine has affirmed – this time in no uncertain terms – that a two-week study investigating commercial options for launching the Orion spacecraft to the Moon has concluded that Falcon Heavy could be the only practical option if NASA chooses to proceed
oh no no no no no no no

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:13:57 2019 No.10517961

>>10517929
you could launch an impactor at the moon and it'd only take a few days to get there
>>10517936
that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard, because it's not even putting an ICPS on top of a Falcon Heavy core stage, it's putting ICPS on top of the second stage of a full Falcon Heavy stack
that's going to wiggle itself to fucking bits and look ridiculous
I hope it actually happens so we can post dumb memes

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:15:46 2019 No.10517966 >>10517961 >wiggle itself to fucking bits and look ridiculous then SpaceX will go >"Unity not us :^)"

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:16:28 2019 No.10517969 >>10517966 I hope it works desu

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:23:37 2019 No.10517981 >>10517929 >THE MOON three days >MARS six months if the planets are in the right places, right now they're pretty much as close to the worst possible alignment as you can get

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:26:28 2019 No.10517988 >>10517961 Real life is not ksp

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:32:23 2019 No.10518005 >Dragon 2 manned flight slipped again to October 2nd Is there a problem that's being unreported or is it just to reduce the humiliation Boeing's under right now?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:41:29 2019 No.10518020 >>10517936 NASA wins either way, its the contractors who lose.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:43:18 2019 No.10518024 >>10518005 I'm not a huge tinfoil, but the second does seem likely.

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:56:20 2019 No.10518040

>>10517961
So Pence says
>>"We must accelerate and accomplish this goal by any means necessary - we must focus on the mission and not the means"
So Bridenstine says:
>>it would require time [and] cost, and there is risk involved," Bridenstine said. "But guess what—if we're going to land boots on the Moon in 2024, we have time, and we have the ability to accept some risk and make some modifications. All of that is on the table. There is nothing sacred here that is off the table."
So you know what they mean by accept some risk? It means we may end up killing some astronauts before we go back to the moon. The franken rocket is sort of compelling though, ULA does do hydrogen rockets better. That's really the only good thing ULA does.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:57:58 2019 No.10518042 >>10518040 it's not "killing some astronauts" risk, it's "breaking a few rockets doing flight testing" risk maybe even "welp looks like this config won't ever fly and now we're back to square one" risk

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 21:59:43 2019 No.10518047

>>10517560
That's the point though. The ESA owned rocket is still a Russian rocket. If one or both of those rockets malfunction in flight tomorrow Russia will most likely get the blame. Conversely, if both make it to orbit then Russia deserves credit for the win.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 22:02:12 2019 No.10518052 >>10518042 there is nothing sacred here that is off the table.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 22:02:57 2019 No.10518056 >>10518040 Getting in your car to drive to work is a risk, grow up.

Anonymous Tue Apr 2 22:10:30 2019 No.10518074

So this next Soyuz launch completes the O3b MEO constellation. I'm surprised O3b doesn't get more attention. Seems like a more cost effective way of delivering satellite broadband with much better latency than GEO comsats. Starlink and Oneweb will have even better latency of course but they need thousands of satellites to provide global coverage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIkpuyMgHSQ

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 22:10:34 2019 No.10518075 >>10516531 >female aaaaand it's nothing

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 22:13:09 2019 No.10518079 >>10518075 First woman (male)

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 22:15:17 2019 No.10518084 >>10518079 So, she won't be lonely and horny (on the moon)?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 22:18:03 2019 No.10518089 >>10517031 Rockets should be pulled by trains. It just feels so right. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=wXRVqxJeeYw

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 22:36:06 2019 No.10518126 >>10518040 >NASA should stop wasting time and money on rockets and dedicate themselves to building hardware instead SLS cancelled, james webb accelerated, memebase alpha confirmed god bless Pence

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 23:03:37 2019 No.10518182 HOP WHEN

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 23:05:18 2019 No.10518188 >>10518182 they've got methane clathrates forming in their fuel valves, so eventually

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 2 23:48:51 2019 No.10518260 File: 1.15 MB, 500x281, 1551296924207.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10518182

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 01:01:18 2019 No.10518364 >>10517981 Mars is 3-5 months, not 6 months, any manned mission will be optimized for short travel time to mitigate radiation exposure.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 01:13:01 2019 No.10518369 Apparently Russia is going to launch the Progress mission first on April 4. I guess if something goes wrong with that Soyuz rocket then ESA can delay launching the next Soyuz carrying the expensive O3b satellites.

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 04:00:30 2019 No.10518561
File: 137 KB, 900x597, 32582233027_90d19160e8_b.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

It seems Starliner is experiencing more delays.

>Boeing said Tuesday the first orbital test flight of its commercial crew capsule, named the Starliner, will be delayed until August “in order to avoid unnecessary schedule pressure” and give priority on the Atlas 5 rocket’s manifest to a U.S. Air Force communications satellite.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/04/02/boeing-confirms-delay-of-first-starliner-crew-capsule-test-flight-to-august/

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 04:06:18 2019 No.10518565 >>10518561 Related to >>10518005 Hahahaha fuck Boeing

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 04:11:09 2019 No.10518572 >>10518561 I have faith in Boeing they have decades of experience in the field and are the american way to space.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 04:14:41 2019 No.10518575 >>10518572 >desperation: the post

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 04:20:10 2019 No.10518580 >>10518575 A-at least American Women will set foot on the Moon for the first time using a Boeing rocket.

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 04:21:58 2019 No.10518581

>>10518572
>Crew Dragon will never launch, Boeing is our only way to space.
>A-alright, Crew Dragon MAY launch, but only after a bunch of delays and long after Starliner too! H-ha I bet it'll blow up too
>O-okay so Crew Dragon MAY beat Starliner to launch b-but I bet there'll be some big safety issue! O-old space for life!
>Please just let Starliner launch. It'll do a good job, I swear.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 04:30:19 2019 No.10518588 File: 140 KB, 1850x684, 1551837307487.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10518581 >P-pls sir, let us lunch it to space >We won't shut in it, me promise Give it to the poos, it would be hilarious

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 04:32:12 2019 No.10518590 >>10518588 *Shit

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 04:44:59 2019 No.10518604 >>10518590 haha dogs

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 04:56:11 2019 No.10518623 Congress should have downselected to one provider only as was intended.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 05:14:35 2019 No.10518651 >>10518561 This and the reveal that the Ethiopian pilots did everything the instructions said incase of MCAS fucking up and still crashing paints a grim image over Boeing.

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 05:34:55 2019 No.10518670
File: 840 KB, 842x595, D0K4eRuX4AA6v39.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10518089
Is there a reason why russians and europeans assembly Soyuz differently?
In Guiana they usually install payload after rocket already stand vertically on launchpad, while in Baikonur that install payload horizontally in assembly building.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 05:50:48 2019 No.10518681 File: 321 KB, 1309x1230, mars-travel-time.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10518364 It all depends on how much dV you add, and how much you trust your spacecraft. But mostly it depends on the relative positions of Earth and Mars orbits.

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 05:56:57 2019 No.10518684

>>10518651
>everything the instructions said
All because the folks at Boiiiiing! had such a hard on for type certification that they wouldn't even mention MCAS in the official documentation. Western-world pilots apparently knew about it and how to bypass it anyhow.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 06:04:11 2019 No.10518696 >>10518364 6 months is actually the average reduced travel time trajectory, a Hohmann transfer takes more like 8 months on average and can take over 9 months.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 06:05:48 2019 No.10518697 >>10518561 If it's Boeing it ain't going

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 06:09:09 2019 No.10518698 >>10518696 Nice lie bro

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 06:10:14 2019 No.10518699 File: 905 KB, 220x220, Blank+_2f28248c7f6e31e1ed2b5e681742b533.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10518698 I aint lyin bro

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 06:14:12 2019 No.10518703 >>10518699 Want to provide a source then?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 06:55:45 2019 No.10518740 >>10518651 Boeing is a moribund company trying to relive it's golden age past. Now it mainly victimizes the US taxpayer by padding it's income with our money to build non-innovative boondoggles for the us government

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 09:20:03 2019 No.10518901 >>10518740 Bunch of stick-pushers, that's what they are

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 09:34:50 2019 No.10518922 get in here! NASA FY 2020 budget request review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhewOOUevDY We might find out if SLS is really BTFO.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 09:39:34 2019 No.10518937 >>10518922 oh wait I fucked up, it's not live.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 09:41:03 2019 No.10518939 >>10518922 >mountain dew that's from yesterday

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 10:04:29 2019 No.10518987

>>10518696
Correct. Hohmann transfer to Mars (the lowest fuel consumption transfer) is 8-9 months.

However, if you optimize for least travel time as will be the case for manned missions, and have plenty of delta-v to spare (and fully refueled Starship will have around 9km/s), then the transfer takes 3-5 months.

6 months is what your usual probe sent to Mars takes, which is optimized for both aspects.

>>10518681

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 11:19:00 2019 No.10519130 >>10518588 I think Boeing's space activities are one of the least poo-fied positions for obvious reasons

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 11:21:24 2019 No.10519132 >>10518987 >>10518681 what the fuck did we need to go from chemical to nuclear rockets to get any faster travel times? what do we need for a 1 month manned voyage to mars?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 11:30:42 2019 No.10519146 >>10517777 wasted

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 12:05:56 2019 No.10519236 File: 231 KB, 2048x1365, 01-emdrive-update.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10519132 >what do we need for a 1 month manned voyage to mars?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 12:29:23 2019 No.10519269 >>10519236 Nice memedrive

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 13:12:59 2019 No.10519385 >>10518670 westerners have a hardon for vertical assembly the Soviets never gave a shit about that, which continues to Roscosmos

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 13:22:36 2019 No.10519413 >>10519269 can't spell emdrive without memedrive

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 13:47:03 2019 No.10519464 >>10519132 You'd need some kind of supper efficient scifi engine that doesn't exist, or an unrealistically massive transfer vehicle with a fuck ton of delta v.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 14:05:43 2019 No.10519500 >>10519413 Its name speaks for itself.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 14:07:18 2019 No.10519502 >>10519464 >>10519132 All you need is a big fucking laser and the ability to make lightweight mirrors. If you want your passengers to survive the journey, you need two big fucking lasers.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 15:51:54 2019 No.10519673 Arabsat 6A weighs 6,000kg. Falcon 9 is cabable if throwing 8,300kg to geostationary transfer orbit in expendable mode. So why is Falcon Heavy being used for this launch?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 15:52:52 2019 No.10519676 >>10519673 contract was signed for Falcon Heavy many years ago, and Falcon Heavy and Falcon 9 have both gotten much stronger over that time period

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 16:03:28 2019 No.10519692 >>10519236 any updates on Cannae/EM drive

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 16:14:29 2019 No.10519709 >>10519692 fake news, apparently

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 16:16:10 2019 No.10519712 >>10519692 it's a meme

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 16:20:12 2019 No.10519716 >>10519709 >>10519712 say it ain't so

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 16:20:37 2019 No.10519718 >>10519716 unfortunately, reactionless drives aren't real yet

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 16:22:08 2019 No.10519722

>>10519718
Such a shame, the very existence of some engine that would close the distance from Earth to Mars at 30 days or so would be world changing

Hell on such a drive the Moon could be reached in a day or less, imagine traveling to the Moon like we travel to other countries now, no more than 24 hours

fuck

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 17:30:36 2019 No.10519829 >>10519673 Expendable mode.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 18:09:31 2019 No.10519887 >no mercury fueled MPDs >no nuclear pulse propulsion >not even NTRs we're never gonna make it bros, we lost the edge

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 18:39:27 2019 No.10519931 >>10519722 Dude even if it worked it's power requirements for even millinewtons of thrust were so ridiculous that it would be substantially slower than even chemical rockets.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 18:55:09 2019 No.10519961 File: 97 KB, 789x823, 1521770775307.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10519931 lets just build a nerva already and get some fast spaceships going 6 months to a planet is unacceptable

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 19:08:29 2019 No.10519983 why the hell is SLS such a shitshow anyway? do we really just have to accept that NASA built a heavy-lift rocket 50 years ago but they can't do it today?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 19:10:26 2019 No.10519986 File: 13 KB, 220x279, Richard_Shelby,_official_portrait,_112th_Congress.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10519983 Because the primary purpose of SLS has always been the distribution of government pork.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 19:19:11 2019 No.10520005 >>10517150 looks like timber rafting

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 19:24:54 2019 No.10520013 >>10519986 Fortunately they are pretty close to importing enough Mexicans to get this cunt out of office

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 19:37:06 2019 No.10520029

>>10516266
question has this sort of top heavy configuration been tried before, (I know spacex lands rockets, and makes steel ships in the middle of fuck all texas lighting shit on fire)
But point still stands is there a technical precedent for this? I assume it works out on paper atleast?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 19:43:08 2019 No.10520038 >>10519722 yeah, it's a shame perpetual motion machines don't exist

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 19:52:24 2019 No.10520056 >>10520029 we don't know

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 20:17:58 2019 No.10520111 >>10519983 SLS is ultimately not about making an launching a rocket, but giving money to key contractors.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 20:47:55 2019 No.10520174 >>10517031 More like why not just fucking fly it across country

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 20:48:20 2019 No.10520175 File: 494 KB, 760x749, 77vYy7JSf.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10516182

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 20:53:33 2019 No.10520189 >>10516182 >Highwind.mp3 plays

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:03:29 2019 No.10520199 File: 156 KB, 320x210, of happenings.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1113606676274384903

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:15:22 2019 No.10520220 >>10520199 Can't see shit son, looked successful though.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:17:32 2019 No.10520222 FUCK OH FUCK I'M MAKING A WEBM RIGHT NOW EVERYONE STAY CALM

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:18:32 2019 No.10520224 >>10520199 Thought it would look more blue

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:18:54 2019 No.10520226 >>10520199 IT BEGINS

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:19:56 2019 No.10520227 File: 172 KB, 606x454, 7e60cccbe440cb652d5ef040bf81ef66.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10520224 the red color is from the burning concrete

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:22:15 2019 No.10520232 >>10520224 The direct exhaust is very blue if you watch the test stand fire, this is the exhaust burning all the random shit on the ground

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:22:37 2019 No.10520234 File: 2.15 MB, 1442x844, fire-2.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:23:40 2019 No.10520236 File: 1.23 MB, 966x652, fire 2.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:25:52 2019 No.10520240 >>10520234 >>10520236 WHAT IS THIS POTATO SHIT ITS FUCKING 2019 WHERE IS THE 4K FEED REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:26:44 2019 No.10520243 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1113613409767964673 "Starhopper completed tethered hop. All systems green."

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:27:48 2019 No.10520246 File: 198 KB, 1178x508, GREEN.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >GREEN

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:29:55 2019 No.10520252 >>10520199 IT BEGINS >>10520240 it's a webcam that's located far away from the site

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:30:40 2019 No.10520255 >>10520220 >>10520234 >>10520236 >>10520240 For real, where is the dank SpaceX feed? Are they going to do them once it starts hopping properly.

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:32:33 2019 No.10520260

>>10520255
Grasshopper didn't livestream. They only showed the highlight videos afterwards, and the hopper that exploded was barely acknowledged until the blooper video. Knowing them now, it'll be the same with this hopper except uploaded to Twitter/Instagram instead of Youtube.

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:32:47 2019 No.10520261

>>10520240
a local by the name of BocaChicaGal has a really good remote video camera on the ground at the launch site, and we'll have really good video of that (better on NSF L2, but L2 anon will need to be around still for that) like tomorrow or something
so be patient
unless Elon blesses us with another tweet

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:34:17 2019 No.10520267 File: 3.38 MB, 4774x3299, IMG_4481.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10520255 they have a shitton of cameras. Don't worry

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:38:20 2019 No.10520277 >>10520267 Pretty sure those are spotlights anon

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:41:49 2019 No.10520286 >>10520277 on either side are two spotlights but in the middle there's a webcam

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:47:04 2019 No.10520297 [DELETED]

>>10520240
>https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1113606676274384903
Go look at a map and see how far away South Padre Island is from the launch site. Spoiler: it's about 5 miles.
The webcam is using a telescope to see that far. And sometimes clouds love the earth so much they come down from the sky to hang out with it. It's called "fog".

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:48:08 2019 No.10520300

>>10520240
Go look at a map and see how far away South Padre Island is from the launch site. Spoiler: it's about 5 miles.
The webcam is using a telescope to see that far. And sometimes clouds love the earth so much they come down from the sky to hang out with it. It's called "fog".

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 21:57:32 2019 No.10520315 >>10517547 Because spacecraft are very complicated and have thousands of interdependent parts. It's not like putting Legos together.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:01:29 2019 No.10520326 >>10520300 >And sometimes clouds love the earth so much they come down from the sky to hang out with it. It's called "fog". Why hasn't this bug been fixed yet

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:02:31 2019 No.10520328 >>10520315 >t. Richard. 'SLS'. Shelby

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:08:14 2019 No.10520342 File: 15 KB, 311x143, meme.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10520328

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:11:15 2019 No.10520354 >>10520342 Smash that ok button folks

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:13:30 2019 No.10520359 File: 57 KB, 1780x232, 0257.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] heh

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:15:25 2019 No.10520368 File: 69 KB, 2520x206, 796.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] heheh

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:16:42 2019 No.10520371 >>10520359 >>10520368 Based BFR collage poster, the day is getting closer and closer fren.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:17:38 2019 No.10520375 >>10520371 yee

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:19:35 2019 No.10520382 >>10516266

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:21:40 2019 No.10520387 File: 37 KB, 1280x720, im1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10520199 They solved the icing problem!

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:24:45 2019 No.10520398 should be getting official video in a few min

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:26:23 2019 No.10520403 >>10520387 Practically overnight too, pretty amazing. Imagine how long oldspace would twiddle their thumbs over shit like this

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:31:49 2019 No.10520412 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vfiM10lc1M Sounds a little bit flatulent, but it IS methane-fueled...

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:34:02 2019 No.10520420
File: 1.45 MB, 2148x1172, noice.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vfiM10lc1M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vfiM10lc1M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vfiM10lc1M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vfiM10lc1M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vfiM10lc1M

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:34:22 2019 No.10520423 >>10520412 now that's some good video

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:37:26 2019 No.10520429 File: 1.22 MB, 1822x1368, speedy spool up.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] h...he's fast!

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:48:04 2019 No.10520450 File: 633 KB, 1434x666, NSF-2019-04-04-03-02-40-144.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] #3 apparently

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:49:21 2019 No.10520451 File: 1.86 MB, 1280x628, first hopper fire.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] here's a YT-DL -> webm of the fire from the good video >>10520450 did they even ever test SN 2 before today?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:51:15 2019 No.10520454 >>10520451 I don't know, and anybody who does know isn't telling I think they probably did but I'm guessing

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 22:52:49 2019 No.10520459 File: 415 KB, 284x350, ice.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] icey

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:04:09 2019 No.10520489 >>10520451 Hot damn

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:06:43 2019 No.10520492 >>10520451 K I N O I N O

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:07:53 2019 No.10520495 >>10520451 three of those is going to be monstrous

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:22:03 2019 No.10520516 >>10520495 Monstrously kino you mean Fuck I am so hype THREE ENGINE HOP WHEN

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:22:20 2019 No.10520518 How are we supposed to deal with the excess radiation in space?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:27:07 2019 No.10520526 >>10520518 don't send people.

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:28:07 2019 No.10520527

>>10520518
The most consistent fuck you up radiation comes from the sun, in the example of a BFR flight, there will be the mass of the engine bells, engine blocks, fuel tanks and cargo between the sun and crew which should be substantial enough to cancel out most of it except for flares in which case everyone piles into a storm shelter which will be a tiny box surrounded by shielding such as the water supply for the crew as well as heavy metals. As far as GCRs, nothing to be done about it, just a risk you have to take but all evidence points to it not being a huge risk over 6 months or so. There is no real way to stop GCRs short of metres of water/lead so it's just something people are going to have to suck up and deal with until we have sci fi fusion torch ships or whatever.

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:30:58 2019 No.10520536

Absolute fucking awful week for SLS
>Boeing is full of fuck, schedule looks like it’s gonna slip again
>NASA growing impatient, EM-1 may fly on FH
>oh wait, we can add ICPS to FH, making SLS completely redundant
>starship prototype advances into flight testing

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:32:36 2019 No.10520540 >>10520536 also >europa clipper is a FH candidate >LUVOIR has a new design config for starship

Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:37:13 2019 No.10520548
File: 82 KB, 800x600, 1553415660931.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10519961
something something nooclear bad because glowing green death goo that lasts forever or whatever the fuck
Were Nixon not an unbelievably colossal faggot that cancelled the program, we would have had boots on mars in fucking 1981
and were normies not gullible unthinking cattle, we would be considerably better off across the board in other aspects of life as well

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:38:41 2019 No.10520550 >>10520326 we're still reverse engineering the program we still haven't figured out how to open the command window to fix shit

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:39:20 2019 No.10520551 >>10520375 I see a fourth fucking digit slot there how goddamn many do you have

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:39:56 2019 No.10520552 >>10520495 ASS BLAST S S B L A S T

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:41:56 2019 No.10520558 >>10520451 damn son

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:43:05 2019 No.10520561 >>10520495 Imagine 32

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 3 23:55:16 2019 No.10520579 >>10520561 >"future spacecraft will make this look like a rowboat"

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 00:01:19 2019 No.10520588 >>10520550 This is what you get with fucking closed-sourced, undocumented software...

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 00:24:41 2019 No.10520630 >>10520527 >just suck up and deal with it it saddens me to think of all the cancer we'll be subjecting people to until we figure out something to combat this.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 00:32:00 2019 No.10520642 >>10520588 you are closed source, undocumented software.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 00:39:55 2019 No.10520655 >>10520642 >undocumented not with a face book account

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 00:43:58 2019 No.10520667 >>10520451 this is 1 engine. Wtf is the full configuration going to look like as it flies through the air. That thing fired for like 2 seconds.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 00:55:47 2019 No.10520687 >>10520199 dawn of a new space age

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 00:55:49 2019 No.10520688 >>10520667 also I really doubt that was anywhere near full throttle

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 00:58:20 2019 No.10520691 >>10520688 Could you even see it, as it launches? The sheer volume of bs it would kick up would be incredibly immense. Chad BFR, you'll see this shit for miles. A giant plume into the sky. What a dab

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 01:00:33 2019 No.10520697 50/50 that either something broke or that tomorrow we'll have a long test

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 01:01:45 2019 No.10520699 >>10520697 I agree, either shit's broke and going nowhere or brownsville is going to regret letting SpaceX set up shop where they did

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 01:03:40 2019 No.10520702
File: 437 KB, 1663x1245, 5c72013807265.image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10520699
people will complain about the noise 100%. Expect to see SpaceX-funded playground 2: electric boogaloo
https://www.wacotrib.com/news/business/spacex-nighttime-test-fees-pay-for-park-upgrades-in-mcgregor/article_7678f8b9-d3ae-5b56-b80f-4fdeed5a14a4.html

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 01:11:20 2019 No.10520710

>>10520630
Most estimates put radiation doso of a Mars mission somewhere around 1 Sv, which means lifetime cancer risk increase of 5% or so (from 30% to 35%). It is not as big of a deal as people think.

Now if you want to have a colony with children on Mars, you better have underground habitats.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 01:13:59 2019 No.10520716 >>10520710 _____ ______

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 01:14:44 2019 No.10520720 >>10520716 wat

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 01:18:35 2019 No.10520730 >>10520403 >Inb4 boring flamethrower

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 01:20:30 2019 No.10520733 >>10517101 It's not quite unrelated. The limit was set so existing missiles would fit on the Interstate Highway system, iirc.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 01:26:34 2019 No.10520741 File: 25 KB, 670x346, .jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10520720

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 01:48:12 2019 No.10520784 >>10520702 >it's SpaceX themed. That' s very cute

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:32:09 2019 No.10520839 Jesus the amount of hellfire from that tiny engine is fucking incredible >The little brap when they cut off the engine Hnnnnnng FULL HOP WHEN

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:32:23 2019 No.10520840 >>10520710 >1 Sv Not an expert here, but isn't exposure to 1Sv lethal? If taken during a lifetime, it might just mean higher cancer risk, but 1Sv during a few months, that sounds like too much.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:35:41 2019 No.10520842 >>10520840 >>10520710 Some context: ICRP recommendations from 1991: 0,05 Sv per year, 0,1 Sv per 5 years, 0,4 Sv per lifetime

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:38:07 2019 No.10520848 >>10520840 it’s not a linear correlation

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:39:12 2019 No.10520850 Anyone have a sound clip from 6-8 miles out? Lots of people on FB said they could hear it

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:43:05 2019 No.10520854 it’s the world’s simplest thrust plate. If the hopper lifts off, then the raptor generated enough thrust to overcome the weight of the hopper itself

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:43:31 2019 No.10520855

say what you are gonna say but mars will create a new wave of a-rad drugs. Or some new sick suits, or rad absorbant materials. Who really knows. Necessity is the mother of inventions.

Besides anyone born on mars will already be a lanklet, extra cancer is a fine trade off.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:48:11 2019 No.10520863 >>10520855 Cancer won’t be an issue in 20 years. medical science is advancing still

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:49:21 2019 No.10520867 File: 111 KB, 780x585, Stalker_ddbb1f_4322579.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10520855

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:49:23 2019 No.10520868 >>10520839 see >>10520450 Once that is lodged in the ass, then it will blast

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:54:39 2019 No.10520875 >>10520868 SN 4 is needed. Can’t have uneven thrust, there are only three slots in a line for raptors on the hopper

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 02:56:06 2019 No.10520878 >>10520875 What happened to SN2? Or is that the one in the hopper and they fucked the first one?

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 03:04:07 2019 No.10520894

>>10520878
SN 1 was damaged https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1098653939141009408?lang=en
SN 2 has changes and is in the hopper right now https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1104945142065070081?lang=en https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1098656849740451840?lang=en

SN 3 will likely be the next one in, but SN 4 is needed for the full three in a row config to fully populate hopper with engines

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 03:11:40 2019 No.10520908 how quickly can they assemble raptors? 32 is a fuck ton. If they lose a starship, it seems that things get sketchy. How much money can they have if they ever lose a starship. So much complicated, and difficult plumbing and high end engines.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 03:27:11 2019 No.10520924 >>10520908 not very fast, but they'll improve it once they figure out all the steps and can streamline the assembly line the first few after the prototyping stage always take a long ass time

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 03:28:58 2019 No.10520928

>>10520894
Cool, I figured that was the case, thanks anon.

>>10520908
At the moment seems a little slow but still pretty fucking fast compared to oldspace. This will get much, much faster as the design is standardised and they can crank them out assembly line fashion. Look at how fast they produce Merlin's and expect the same timeframe or quicker for raptors as the demand grows.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 03:32:35 2019 No.10520935 >>10520908 These machines are simpler than a modern turbofan.There was no reason why production took months and years other than idiotic oldspace practices.Spacex was/is building merlins in just a few days

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 04:05:01 2019 No.10520969 File: 10 KB, 319x316, 1326659766401.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10520536 >oh wait, we can add ICPS to FH, making SLS completely redundant Why stop at ICPS? EUS on Falcon Heavy soon, brothers!

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 04:10:51 2019 No.10520974 File: 103 KB, 600x315, a.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10520702 >reusing so much that you reuse your playground design for your interplanetary rocket ship

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 04:16:34 2019 No.10520983

>>10520908
They're literally just coming out of RnD and they have no real use for them yet outside of more RnD on Starhoppers. So obviously they won't get started on the full assembly line process cranking out dozens of engines quite yet. They'd just clutter up the place.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 04:23:46 2019 No.10521003 >>10520983 >>10520935 thanks boys, that gives me hope

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 05:50:50 2019 No.10521097 >>10520029 Top heavy is better for rocket stability. The worst thing for stability is a very large mostly empty fairing, as it has a large surface area but low density, which means in flight dynamic forces are fighting to flip the rocket end over end.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 05:58:39 2019 No.10521111 >>10520688 If it was it'd lift the Hopper off the ground pretty fast, they probably started it up at minimum throttle and started throttling up for a couple seconds, and as soon as the feet left the ground they cut the engine.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 05:59:46 2019 No.10521112 >>10520691 The point of a launch pad is to limit all the debris of a launch to just water vapor from the sound suppression system and exhaust gasses from the rocket.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 06:03:03 2019 No.10521117

>>10520842
Correct, and they obviously aren't going to recommend a radiation dose that will knowingly result in an increased cancer risk. Basically what those numbers are are targets for background radiation levels for any manned outposts on the Moon/ Mars/Callisto/Asteroids, since you're going to be spending a long time there and you have the bulk material resources needed to provide shielding.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 06:06:01 2019 No.10521122

>>10520855
Rad drugs only work if there's radioactive elements in the environment (iodine pills blast your ass with non-radioactive iodine and thus prevents your body from absorbing the radioactive iodine that comes out of nuclear reactions, for example).

You can't take any drugs to save you from cosmic rays, all you can do is treat the damage they cause. If we ever cure cancer then cosmic rays become literally not a problem anymore, for any total dose, but until then the risk is there.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 06:48:35 2019 No.10521157 Progress 72 launch in Baikonur live stream https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21X5lGlDOfg

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 06:57:54 2019 No.10521170 File: 952 KB, 2136x3216, Soyuz_TMA-9_launch_big.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10521157 4 minutes to launch

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 07:08:44 2019 No.10521180 File: 1021 KB, 1920x1080, progress_2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Looking good so far, if anyone interested.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 07:24:58 2019 No.10521199

>>10520699
I thought the original agreement was for 12 launchers per year from Boca Chica. I didn't think McGregor-tier testing was part of it. Anyhow, South Padre better get their ass in gear and build those viewing bleachers at the camper park already.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 08:54:42 2019 No.10521298 File: 665 KB, 2048x1755, FH,BLOCK5.jpg_large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] ITS UP

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 08:55:57 2019 No.10521301 >>10521298 With no payload, so it's coming back down again

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 09:13:39 2019 No.10521334

>>10520710
except all our studies on radiation dosage are pretty much useless for GCR exposure. GCR are quite different in the damage they cause.
>>10520855
Making antirad drugs and thin materials capable of absorbing radiation might turn out to be impossible.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 09:19:30 2019 No.10521346 >FH2 vertical >Hopper fired Today is looking good lads

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 09:25:16 2019 No.10521361 >>10521346 https://twitter.com/SpaceflightNow/status/1113693180476710912

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 09:28:46 2019 No.10521367 >>/wsg/2777286 I slept for a bit and Hopper test happened. What a time we live in.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 09:31:13 2019 No.10521372 >>10521367 Three arrows for cross board links

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 09:32:08 2019 No.10521374 >>10521367 >>>/wsg/2777286 >>10521372 Yep, missed one

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 09:44:48 2019 No.10521393 >>10521298 >2019 >taking a picture of a picture Also why doesn't it have the black interstage like Falcon 9 has?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 09:56:38 2019 No.10521413 File: 117 KB, 1299x546, Nixon nixes the space program.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10520548 fuck nixon FUCK NIXON

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 10:02:28 2019 No.10521426 >>10520420 BRAP

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 10:04:56 2019 No.10521432 Elon’s at the pad

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 10:09:23 2019 No.10521440 >>10521432 Is that good or bad, I wonder.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 10:12:16 2019 No.10521445 >>10521432 How do you know this

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 10:20:40 2019 No.10521457 >>10521445 >inb4 selfie of Elon at the pad

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 10:27:21 2019 No.10521468 Progress successful docked few minutes ago.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 10:33:02 2019 No.10521485 >>10521468 nice nice

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 10:52:35 2019 No.10521512 https://www.geekwire.com/2019/amazon-project-kuiper-broadband-satellite/amp/ amazon throws their hat in the ring >>10521445 a tallish man without his reflective vest was just being shown around the hopper

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 11:05:39 2019 No.10521541 File: 201 KB, 1080x1576, 1553595767986.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Elon is in a SEC trial from 2 pm on. Far from a rocket launch pad.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 11:08:19 2019 No.10521549 >>10521541 Why the fuck would he need to show up at his own trial? He has lawyers for that

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 11:29:51 2019 No.10521600

>>10521512
Great, another constellation is exactly what we needed...Bezos is really behind the curve on this front, by the time these start launching hundreds of Starlink, Telesat and OneWeb satellites will be in orbit which means the market will already be massively over saturated. Furthermore, we have yet to be provided with a reasonable revenue case for these constellations, so I'm thinking we're going to experience a repeat of the 1990s satellite bubble explosion. Also, this ignores Kessler syndrome and the fact that the FCC may not be too happy with another multi-thousand satellite constellation, stopping Bezos in his tracks.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 11:48:19 2019 No.10521637 https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/science/israel-beresheet-moon.html the israeli lunar mission completed entered lunar orbit today & is scheduled to land on the surface April 11th.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 11:49:21 2019 No.10521639 >>10521637 >the israeli lunar mission completed entered lunar orbit *entered lunar orbit. i need to go to bed.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 11:51:04 2019 No.10521644 >>10521199 they're limited to 12 launch campaigns a year and each launch campaign is limited to a few hundred hours of closures

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 11:52:36 2019 No.10521648 >>10521600 do you know how many people live in the country and aren't served by the big landline companies? it'll basically destroy Hughesnet's market share and expand beyond that because current satellite SUCKS

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 11:53:23 2019 No.10521650 >>10521600 There can be millions of satellites and it wont cause issues if there's proper burnout phase. FCC satellites requirement includes burnout phase, so any possible amount of satellites is fine.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 12:24:04 2019 No.10521723

>>10521334
>except all our studies on radiation dosage are pretty much useless for GCR exposure. GCR are quite different in the damage they cause.

Nope, GCR exposure is well studied in such populations as frequent flyers, people living in high altitudes, or astronauts. Radiation is a concern but we know radiation will not stop a Mars mission, period.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 12:54:42 2019 No.10521766 Guys, I was trolling at first, but what if BFR flies before SLS?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 12:56:06 2019 No.10521769 >>10521766 no shit it'll fly first

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:01:49 2019 No.10521787

>>10521769
I mean the full stack, and with actual payload.
Before they started building the hopper, I was confident it was not happening anytime soon, but seeing this can test fire last night really made me think.
Will NASA commit seppuku then?
They'd be in a world of shit, that much's for sure.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:02:48 2019 No.10521793 >>10521787 I think it might be orbital pretty soon, they're going to want to do a lot of testing of the heat shield

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:03:36 2019 No.10521797 ArianeSpace Soyuz launch right now! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uTxZbbRsgY

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:04:16 2019 No.10521801 >>10521766 It does not even matter. SLS may fly once before BFR. Then it will take another two fucking years to fly a second time.. SLS is simply not relevant.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:04:44 2019 No.10521802

>>10521766
I doubt BFR will fly before SLS. However, if it did, then I expect much stronger encouragement from non-pro-SLS parts of the government to get SLS rushed out. Also pro-SLS factions will most likely double down on advertising the benefits of SLS over BFR. Mainly how the SLS uses proven and safe hardware while BFR is new and somehow inherently unsafe.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:08:12 2019 No.10521809 >>10521802 I still doubt it too, but I'd say we're about 1 more delay from it being plausible.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:09:22 2019 No.10521814 >>10521802 I fully expect BFR to Shuttle comparisons

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:11:05 2019 No.10521816

>>10521650
>one sat gets niggled by something we can't/aren't tracking
>it cascades with other sats
>oh god oh fuck
just because we can have millions does not mean we should, for the simple fact that the chance of kessler syndrome increases exponentially for every new sat
then you got shitters like the poos, who just blew up one of their own sats for dick waving, and have now put the goddamn ISS in danger, let alone the fucktons of other satellites on the debris path

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:12:10 2019 No.10521818

>>10521809
You mean like the 2020 launch? If that gets delayed then it'll most likely just get pushed back to early 2021 and by then BFR would not have progressed as much. Considering how many political pot shots are beening taken at SLS nowadays, theres a sudden pressure to actually get a rocket done "on time" rather than line the pockets of Boeing.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:12:14 2019 No.10521819 >>10521802 >proven and safe hardware SLS is literally all new hardware at this point. Different boosters. Different assembly of core stage. Modified engines, granted they've been tested to death.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:17:59 2019 No.10521829 https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/04/mackenzie-bezos-to-keep-25-percent-of-couples-amazon-stock-after-finalizing-divorce.html yow

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:18:32 2019 No.10521831

>>10521816
We have the capability to field billion satellites without issues if satellites have proper procedure to destroy their satellites properly.
Kessler syndrome is only an issue if rogue states/companies insert objects into orbit without alerting a space agency that properly documents/tracks trajectory. Once in orbit, if there's no erratic propulsion, the orbit is fairly deterministic thus predictive.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:22:46 2019 No.10521839

>>10521831
>orbits of a proper satellite are predictable
no fucking shit you colossal retard
the issue is those fleks of paint and lost bolts that can blow fat chunks off of the things they hit, which hit others and create more shrapnel, which makes more and more in a cascade
that's what kessler syndrome is

when shit breaks off, it doesn't despawn like a video game, it stays up there to fuck yet more things in the ass

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:23:18 2019 No.10521840 >>10521829 there goes 36 billion dollars of potential BO money

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:23:20 2019 No.10521841 File: 75 KB, 963x539, fh_orion.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10516266 How would that work without extending the launch tower?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:25:50 2019 No.10521844 >>10521819 so it's even more fucking worthless? the whole goddamn point of SLS was to reuse shuttle hardware if they're making everything brand new, they could have just fucking made a new rocket that was actually fucking useful

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:30:02 2019 No.10521856 FH launch now likely Monday

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:30:40 2019 No.10521858 >>10521839 If it becomes an issue, we can always zap it with lasers. Both are an equal prospect for coming to reality.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:30:53 2019 No.10521860 >>10521841 Are you suggesting that extending the tower is more expensive than SLS?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:31:48 2019 No.10521861 >>10521797 Goddammit stick to Frogspeak. You're shaming all of us.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:32:17 2019 No.10521862 File: 90 KB, 500x303, merely pretending.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10521858

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:32:50 2019 No.10521864 >>10521860 Well, seems like a lot of work for a single launch.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:36:35 2019 No.10521872 >>10521841 >ULA seething in the background I have to say, that black cladding was a good idea.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:41:57 2019 No.10521880 >>10521864 something something billion dollar single use SLS mobile structure something something

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:44:16 2019 No.10521886

>>10521844
While the major parts are "new", they're evolutions from parts that have assembly lines and expertise behind them. So, in theory, SLS would still develop faster than an entirely new rocket.

Emphasis on "in theory". In actuality, SLS isn't a rocket program. It's a jobs program, so it's developing slower than expected, because most of those jobs and money will be at risk once (or if) SLS flies.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:47:28 2019 No.10521894 >>10521886 They literally used a new process to just force tanks parts together instead of simply soldering them. That thing is new as fuck. Not sure how it's named.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:49:18 2019 No.10521901

>>10521880
Reusable launch pads are a meme. The amount of performance you lose from making ot reusable can compromise a mission (ex. Tyranny of the Launch Pad Equation). Plus SpaceX hasn't even proven yet that reusable launch pads are economically viable. The amount of money spent on refurbishing a launch pad is so great that you might as well buy a cheaper expendable launch pad. Supporters of reusable launch pads are leading spaceflight into a dead end and end up forcing other responsible launch providers (ex. ULPA United Launch Pad Alliance) to waste money.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:52:45 2019 No.10521912 >>10521894 Do you mean friction stir welding?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:54:05 2019 No.10521915 >>10521797 Why isn't SpaceX launching these satellites? Surely they are much cheaper than Soyuz.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:55:05 2019 No.10521916

>>10521894
I mean it's a cool technique and it has applications.
But in this case, it was not required at all.
Can the SLS project get any more sad?
>>10521912
Not sure. I saw it a million years ago, and from what I understood, they just used sheer force to get plates to stick together.
Now this was made a whole lot more complicated by the fact they were dealing with cylinders.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:58:09 2019 No.10521923 >>10521912 But yeah, I've seen a video of this technique, and I don't think that's what they were describing at all.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:59:15 2019 No.10521924 https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/11138610412161966 Elon is at the court

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 13:59:22 2019 No.10521925

>>10521916
It's friction stir welding. Mishoud completely refit their plant to support this new way of welding.

I don't know if it's required. I do know that tanks welded via friction stirring tend to be much stronger than tanks welded by conventional means. But even if it were somehow necessary, it shouldn't have taken over 10 years to figure out.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:02:17 2019 No.10521932 >>10521925 Well, then, they just described it badly. Think I saw it on NASA's website, though. I guess it involves some force too.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:04:21 2019 No.10521938 >>10521925 >I don't know if it's required Elon's team are just yielding the weld torch like there's no tomorrow, though.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:06:18 2019 No.10521939 >>10521924 that's not a tweet that exists

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:14:36 2019 No.10521963 >>10521939 quiet goy, can't you see he's trying to FUD here he needs those nickels and dimes from his days of shilling

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:22:42 2019 No.10521981

>>10521963
Honestly, at this point, I don't know that any shilling will work.
What happened yesterday means Hopper is actually serious shit.
It fired for 3 seconds. It's important, because it higher than 1 second.
Also, it didn't just blow up.
SpaceX is showing us simple wielding techniques are all you need to go to Space.
Now everyone in old space is counting down to how fast they can do it again.
They'd be in a hurry to shut the fuck up.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:28:41 2019 No.10521993 >>10521963 >>10521939 https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/1113861041216196616 Link got messed up sorry

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:31:32 2019 No.10522003 >>10521993 Most likely Tesla shit. I don't really care until I see them on the used market, though. But I've been noticing them, here in France, recently.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:32:51 2019 No.10522006 >>10522003 They're everywhere in California when I visited don't go, by the way, shit state I see them around my home state from time to time

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:41:46 2019 No.10522034 >>10521981 Let me add, when this shit goes airbone, and gets back down, there will be a serious increase in anti-depressant medicine for some reason. I mean, they had the technology, but they never used it to its potential.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:45:47 2019 No.10522043 File: 970 KB, 924x874, 1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] this is the "I'm going to win" look

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:47:20 2019 No.10522051 >>10522043 Why is he going, though?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:48:25 2019 No.10522055 >>10522051 he's being respectful of the court system

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:49:30 2019 No.10522058 >>10522051 he has no respect for the SEC

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:53:51 2019 No.10522076

>>10522058
So it's about his stunt with buying back Telsa share thing?
I can understand where it was coming from, and it was ill advised sharing it through nigger twitter.
Now, a year or so later, we can judge it was not impactful at all, so I guess that's what he'll plead.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:55:19 2019 No.10522084 >>10522076 oh no, he's being charged with contempt of court for supposedly disrespecting that buying back Tesla shares thing

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:56:36 2019 No.10522088
File: 81 KB, 1208x466, lol.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10522084
>>10522076
not exactly, this all stems from the SEC settlement to get approval for material Tesla tweets, which they say he violated

of course the SEC is being fucktards about it

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:57:24 2019 No.10522090 >>10522084 Well, he's in deep then. Not that it impacts SpaceX as this will never be on the market.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:58:01 2019 No.10522093 >>10522090 we'll find out and I don't think it'll affect SpaceX at all

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:58:44 2019 No.10522094 >>10522090 He's said that SpaceX could go public once they have a large Mars base. That was a few years ago though

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 14:59:49 2019 No.10522096 >>10522094 Yeah, but that's by 2050, even in Elon time.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:02:07 2019 No.10522101 RS-25 test soon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21X5lGlDOfg

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:02:16 2019 No.10522103 >>10522094 Also, we're faced with new problems. What if Elon flees to Mars and don't want to pay his fee to SEC anymore?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:04:48 2019 No.10522107 >>10522101 Why, they literally have hours of tests so far.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:07:34 2019 No.10522117 >>10522103 what if he holds the world hostage via threat of interplanetary bombardment? what if he overthrows the world order?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:12:48 2019 No.10522132 >>10522117 Nah, he'd need nukes. Not something your just come over.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:13:16 2019 No.10522135 >>10521413 remember anon, we would have been on mars in '81 if it weren't for nixon. thank god he axed the budget, that'd be such an awful future.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:15:17 2019 No.10522138

"SpaceX may pause testing at the site for up to 60 days after the current round is complete. The company did not confirm a specific timeline once current testing objectives are complete"

booooo
https://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/testing-closures-within-the-law/article_0b67ba8a-56e8-11e9-a008-c70420d80cb5.html?fbclid=IwAR3Lx5ZuoEh2CZI1wxzKo8jDuYnRK1ZEBx034P0rgtr3R39BOrgXMLYVH6o

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:15:46 2019 No.10522141 >>10522132 orbital/interplanetary bombardment is a sufficient WMD desu

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:18:18 2019 No.10522151 >>10522141 Nah, terminal velocity is a thing, even for sharp objects. Unless you launch them from the moon, but then you get a half week delay.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:19:33 2019 No.10522153 >>10522138 Oh noes, we agreed to a launch site, but we didn't expect loundness!

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:19:43 2019 No.10522154 >>10522151 dumbass, launch them from Mars

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:20:34 2019 No.10522157 >>10522154 >9 month delay.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:21:19 2019 No.10522161 >>10522157 >implying Earth would piss off Mars at the best part of the transfer window

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:21:29 2019 No.10522162 >>10522157 three month, less if you really get it moving and limited return strike capability send it down around venus and you can approach from the sun so they'll never see it coming

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:23:18 2019 No.10522168 >>10522161 Yeah, that was a best case figure. And anyways, damage from a kinetic bolt wouldn't be that much. With month warning, you can just fucking evacuate.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:28:01 2019 No.10522180 >>10520412 >>10520451 hopefully someone can do a webm with synced audio, the cameras are very far away so audio lags far behind

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:29:00 2019 No.10522181 this SLS/RS-25 hype video fucking sucks >>10522168 you could still blow up DC or Huntsville you don't target people with that stuff, you target infrastructure, this was a lesson known by the IRA during the troubles

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:29:32 2019 No.10522184 >>10522162 That's so retarded. Imagine a game where it takes weeks for your shot to hit the enemy. What will they do? Did you see the matrix?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:30:52 2019 No.10522187 >>10522181 >BIGGER THAN A COMPACT CAR >73 TIMES FASTER THAN A RACE CAR >WOW WE MADE SIXTEEN (16) OF THEM >MARS >JOBBBBS

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:31:26 2019 No.10522188 >>10522181 Nah this would take significant mass throw. It's actually not a real threat.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:31:54 2019 No.10522189

>>10522103
>What if Elon flees to Mars and don't want to pay his fee to SEC anymore?
It's hard to take fiat currency with you when fleeing the fucking planet. Precious metals woudn't be as valuable as basic terrestrial chemicals like oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen.

>>10522132
>Nah, he'd need nukes. Not something your just come over.
Rods from God, m8.

>>10522135
>remember anon, we would have been on mars in '81 if it weren't for nixon. thank god he axed the budget, that'd be such an awful future.
Maybe if LBJ hadn't gotten us in to 'nam, things would be different. Maybe if LHO wasn't such a faggot and Kennedy survived his term, the Russkies might have landed on the moon first. After all, they did just about everything else in space first.

>>10522162
>three month, less if you really get it moving
They don't need reverse thrust to slow down, so you can add as much dV as you want, it just makes the boom bigger. But don't miss!

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:34:07 2019 No.10522190 >>10522189 >Rods from God Aka, the most inefficient weapon in history. Everyone will just see it coming weeks in advance and just move away. But maybe you should read the thread.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:35:14 2019 No.10522193 >>10522189 if only Korolev hadn't kicked it

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:36:16 2019 No.10522198 >>10522190 >everyone will see it coming and just move away that's a fucking good thing you retard, it lets you commit infrastructure terrorism without killing anybody

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:36:36 2019 No.10522200 >>10522193 Play Battlezone 98 for a sniff of it. What a great game it was.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:38:25 2019 No.10522207 >>10522198 Wew, that would get us nowhere. Imagine negotiations when the shot has already been fired.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:39:16 2019 No.10522208 >>10522207 well, there are five more currently on the production line

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 15:41:37 2019 No.10522213 >>10522208 Nah, I don't think so.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 16:04:43 2019 No.10522260 File: 55 KB, 1600x900, wojak.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Anyone baking? I was at /pol/, Assad heard some rumors about /sg/ on /sci/. You better bake fast, he hates bakeries.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 16:15:57 2019 No.10522291 File: 19 KB, 867x236, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10522138 lol

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 16:19:37 2019 No.10522300 So two Soyuz successfully delivered payloads to orbit today. Maybe Russia got their game back after all.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 16:30:28 2019 No.10522325 Hey /sg/, do you think that NASA will get people on the moon bu 2024?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 16:30:28 2019 No.10522326 >>10522189 >It's hard to take fiat currency with you when fleeing the fucking planet Musk could easily use his favorite cryptocurrency Dogecoin from Mars

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 16:48:26 2019 No.10522361

>>10522326
How do you update a blockchain with a 25 minute comms lag? But more important, there's nothing up there to buy, and if he bought something from Earth, the shipping costs would be "astronomical". Anything he left behind could just be seized to pay debts.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 16:57:36 2019 No.10522395

>>10522361
>How do you update a blockchain with a 25 minute comms lag?
You can easily send and receive crypto from Mars. Transactions can be signed offline without an internet connection and broadcast at a later time. For real time use the Mars colony would need its own blockchain though.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 17:01:17 2019 No.10522408 >>10522325 How long do you think it will take to develop and test a lunar lander? NASA is a giant bureaucratic hellhole...

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 17:11:29 2019 No.10522436 >>10522408 Could a trimmed down Falcon 9 first stage land on the moon?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 17:13:03 2019 No.10522439 >>10522395 >For real time use the Mars colony would need its own blockchain though. Or their own set of lightning nodes.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 17:32:24 2019 No.10522484 With all these MEO and LEO satellite constellations being launched is there really any rationale for geosynchronous comsats anymore?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 17:32:41 2019 No.10522486 >>10522436 No, the engines are too strong Also you'd need to invent orbital cryogenic refueling first And mitigate boiloff on the week long trip to the moon Also the engines are not optimal for vacuum operation

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 17:38:07 2019 No.10522497 File: 252 KB, 642x1448, Screen Shot 2019-04-04 at 3.37.46 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10522291 relevant parts

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 17:42:51 2019 No.10522505

>>10522486
>No, the engines are too strong
Right, a single Merlin is barely weak enough for Earth landings.
>Also the engines are not optimal for vacuum operation
I think the idea was making a version specifically for lunar landings, not re-using the core that got shit off of the planet. The use case for lunar landings is completely different than for a first stage. First stage boosters are to get shit out of our gravity well.
SS (without Heavy) should work for Mars and Moon landings.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 18:15:22 2019 No.10522558 >>10522484 no

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 18:25:48 2019 No.10522571 >>10522486 >>Also you'd need to invent orbital cryogenic refueling first Is that why we don't have refueling depots in orbit yet

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 18:26:08 2019 No.10522572 >>10522300 Soyuz could fail ten times in a row and still be the safest ride to orbit in history.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 18:33:36 2019 No.10522587 >>10522571 You wouldn't need "refueling" with transfer hoses and shit if you simply left an attachable tank in orbit. Just swap tanks and you're good to go.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 19:03:09 2019 No.10522660

>>10521512
I'm having a hard time keeping count of all these new satellite constellations:
SpaceX/Starlink
OneWeb
O3b
Telesat
LeoSat
Amazon
US, Europe, China and Russia will probably launch their own LEO/MEO constellations to support military communications
Space is getting crowded. It's hard to imagine these tens of thousands of satellites all orbiting the earth at once.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 19:03:14 2019 No.10522661

>>10522571
With a large enough station you could actively cool the cryogenic fuel. You'd just need a lot of electricity and some big honkin' radiators.

The other problem is getting the fuel to flow from one tank to another in zero G. Theres a few ways around it, but the most efficient solution would be to have a spinning station for artificial gravity.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 19:06:32 2019 No.10522666

>>10522571
yeah
also fuel doesn't sit around forever, it boils off, so you can't keep it, so it needs to go right before the payload it's launching out of the Earth Moon system
so you can't put it up there waiting to sell it to the government for their interplanetary probes, and basically nobody's going to do it until they can be sure they have customers
and no customers are going to bank on a system that doesn't exist

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 19:07:33 2019 No.10522669 >>10522661 it wouldn't even need to spin very fast, you could use pumps for the transfer, the spingrav is to make sure that all the boil-off bubbles and air pockets form in a consistent place

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 19:49:00 2019 No.10522747 >>10522497 SpaceX is probably bringing more tourism to that backwater swamp shithole than ever before.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 19:51:45 2019 No.10522752 Time for new thread

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 19:52:56 2019 No.10522755 >>10521413 NIX'D

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 20:09:11 2019 No.10522786 >>10522752 make sure the OP is an absolute shitpost

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 20:10:19 2019 No.10522790 >>10521938 >>10521925 Falcon 9 is also friction stir welded, the fact that people point to SLS delays as being caused in part by using friction stir welding is laughable.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 20:24:06 2019 No.10522819

>>10522790
>Falcon 9 is also friction stir welded
Interesting! I didn't know that.

>the fact that people point to SLS delays as being caused in part by using friction stir welding is laughable
I forgot which /sg/ thread it was, but there was someone there who argued that the main reason why SLS is taking so long was because of the core tanks. Apparently making a tank that can handle the force of four RS-25s and 2 SRBs is such a herculean task that justifies the 10+ years and nearly $14B.

I know tanks for rockets aren't just a simple pressure vessel that holds fluids, but they are significantly simpler than liquid propellant engines and solid motor boosters. It shouldn't take that long to figure out how to make a reasonably lightweight tank that can handle the forces involved in SLS.

Anonymous Thu Apr 4 20:59:17 2019 No.10522906

>>10522819
Designing a tank is actually very simple. You just compute how large it needs to be, how much it will weigh when full, what the maximum internal pressure will be, what is the maximum thrust it will be subjected to, and what the maximum expected bending loads will be, then build a cylinder with that volume and walls thick enough to take the compression loads, with some stringers to increase stiffness.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 4 21:20:11 2019 No.10522949 New thread >>10522947 >>10522947 >>10522947

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math