/sfg/ Spaceflight General

[Anonymous No.10742778]

RETRO KINO EDITION
old thread:
>>10735734

[Anonymous No.10742799]

>>10742778
Hop when

[Anonymous No.10742807]

L2 anon here: SN-5 is apparently dead, but SN-6 is arriving at McGregor next week and will hopefully be used on the hopper.

[Anonymous No.10742844]

>>10742799
more like "explode when"

[Anonymous No.10742847]

>>10742807
jeez, what are they doing to the poor things in McGregor

[Anonymous No.10742850]

we already have space general here

>>10738118

[Anonymous No.10742865]

>>10742850
/sfg/ is the space general of /sci/, that thread was made by a anon who didnt know there was a general already up.
Lets keep it civial, this is /sci/ we are talking about.

[Anonymous No.10742875]

from Chris:

UPDATE: We understand SpaceX is unlikely to go with SN5 for Starhopper now, and hops will move to NET July, with SN6 (pending good McGregor testing), as a result.

[Anonymous No.10742887]

>>10742875
F

[Anonymous No.10742919]

Live Starship and StarHopper cams:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F78VxhCco3w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F78VxhCco3w

[Anonymous No.10742926]

>>10742919
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqgSVV36wNI

[Anonymous No.10742947]

>>10742875
Its great that they're testing fast and breaking fast. If I had the knowledge, I'd go work in that sort of company. Pushing innovation at lightspeed.

[Anonymous No.10742964]

FH launch thread will be up 24HR before launch. Lots of cool stuff onboard.
SpaceX has an overview page: https://www.spacex.com/stp-2

[Anonymous No.10742997]

>>10742865
Seething. Maybe try r/space.

[Anonymous No.10743001]

>>10742778
What happened with today Proton launch?

[Anonymous No.10743006]

>>10742997
More like generals are cancer and i will do anything i can to keep this contained.
Now crawl back to your corner and jerk off to musk twitter posts.

[Anonymous No.10743028]

>>10743001
Proton is fine, but there was some problems with payload, so apparently it have to be removed from launchpad and rolled back to assembly building.
It will take quite some time.

[Anonymous No.10743034]

>>10743006
Big words from such a small man. Poindexter.

[Anonymous No.10743047]

>>10743034
you need bigger bait.

[Anonymous No.10743053]

>>10743028
Any word of when Proton will be replaced by Angara?

[Anonymous No.10743055]

What, this thread replaced mine with the same topic, i don't know it's not in the archive it's just gone, this replaced it

[Anonymous No.10743062]

>>10743047
Cope.

[Anonymous No.10743064]

asteroid Bennu

[Anonymous No.10743068]

>>10743064

[Anonymous No.10743070]

>>10743068

[Anonymous No.10743071]

>>10743070
asteroid Ryugu

[Anonymous No.10743100]

>>10743062
Okay.

[Anonymous No.10743162]

>>10743068
A couple of those rocks look pretty flat, reminds me of the broken shale along this river near my house. I wonder where it came from?

[Anonymous No.10743174]

>>10742778
The ugliness of the Thor-Able has only been surpassed recently by the trashcan hopper. A fucking bowling pin made from some backyard salvage rockets held together by the duct tape. Not even Vega is able to compete, Thor-Able proportions are just obscene, if not downright insulting.

[Anonymous No.10743186]

>>10743162
Well, that's a bunch of space gravel lumped up into a ball by self-gravity. Billions of years of stones rubbing against each other, and you have something that looks like sedimentaries.

[Anonymous No.10743202]

>>10743001
The Spektr-RG primary battery control unit didn't pass the pre-launch self check, so they postponed the launch to July 12.

[Anonymous No.10743222]

>>10743186
Asteroids like Bennu are thought to be remnants of a protoplanet, right? Seeing the condition of those stones makes me want to know when/how they were formed.

[Anonymous No.10743230]

>>10742847
burning them up, apparently
turns out trying to run a type of engine that's neva been done befoh at a pressure that's nevah been done befoh is hard

[Anonymous No.10743233]

>>10743001
it blew up

[Anonymous No.10743240]

>>10743174
absolutely disgusting

[Anonymous No.10743245]

>>10743222
No, asteroids like Bennu are meant to be formed pretty much directly from the protoplanetary nebula and avoided ever being absorbed by larger bodies. Psyche is a protoplanet remnant, specifically the exposed core of one big enough to start differentiating.

[Anonymous No.10743287]

>>10743245
Neat, I hadn't heard of Psyche before now, that's really interesting and it sounds like we'll get to see it up close in a few more years. So if Bennu and asteroids like it were formed out of material circling the young sun, what formed them initially? I don't think I know much regarding the very early solar system and am curious to learn more about where these pretty rocks were birthed.

[Anonymous No.10743299]

>>10742850
/sfg/ is the right thread, some idiot made that space flight thread

[Anonymous No.10743312]

>>10743245
>Psyche is a protoplanet remnant
Also Vesta, which is a protoplanet, and was thoroughly mapped by Dawn before Ceres https://trek.nasa.gov/vesta/ (check out the layers). It's also right under the hydrostatic equilibrium threshold, i.e. it didn't become large enough to be round.

[Anonymous No.10743351]

spinlaunch is actually planning to do something, which is fucking remarkable for a total meme

[Anonymous No.10743392]

Hey guys, N2O thruster anon here. I was browsing for parts for my project, and to make things easy for me I thought to use pipes and their associated parts to make the chamber+throat assembly (no nozzle just yet). This thing here seems perfect, what do you think?

https://www.mcmaster.com/2161k23

There are two problems with this though. One, I'm not sure if stainless steel can handle a 1500K high pressure oxygen environment. Two, I have no idea what's the maximum rated pressure is for this.

[Anonymous No.10743439]

>>10743351
What the fuck is their launcher even going to look like, a giant trebuchet? I'm having trouble trying to picture just what the fuck they're planning.

[Anonymous No.10743475]

>>10743439
>What the fuck is their launcher even going to look like, a giant trebuchet?

[Anonymous No.10743490]

>>10743351
They even managed to get a DoD contract. What?

[Anonymous No.10743507]

>>10743475
Beautiful, anon.

[Anonymous No.10743629]

[Anonymous No.10743685]

>>10743629
>"What do we do with the warheads?"
>"Just sorta tape 'em together on the top, it'll be fine"

[Anonymous No.10743694]

>>10743685
Meanwhile NASA would probably perform a massive trade study that takes 2 years and a billion dollars just to figure out a way to fit all the warheads together, only to realize that their design is unworkable. (If they were going to make something like that, of course NASA doesn't direct military stuff)

[Anonymous No.10743718]

>>10743439
like this
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10202210B2/
Seems like they're only considering launch velocities up to 4 km/s. The spinning arm radius needs to be pretty big 50-100 m, so that the projectile acceleration manageable. In terms of making a spinning arm that can spin fast enough to it actually doesn't matter how big the radius is, it's purely dependent on the strength to weight ratio of the material. They propose to make the arm out of high tensile strength to weight ratio fibers. The problem is that while our arm is strong under tension, when it is not spinning gravity may cause it to droop down. Maybe they're gonna make some fucking crazy knit structure. Cause if they just have all these fibers aligned going toward the projectile it's not going to be very stiff for pretty much the same reason a rope isn't. I'm also curious how the hell they're going to separate the projectile reliably. A 2 ton projectile effectively weighs as much as a small cargo ship. How they are going to make a mechanism that holds and can release the projectile is beyond me. I think they could use something like big o' space shuttle explosive bolts or wrapping up the projectile in a net of fiber which they cut explosively.

[Anonymous No.10743730]

hey guys what's going on?

[Anonymous No.10743753]

>>10743718
How the hell would you aim something like this? Seems like the payload would tumble too, though I'm sure they'll have some stabilizing system in place by then.

[Anonymous No.10743807]

>>10743718
I cant believe they got 40 million for this.

[Anonymous No.10743813]

>>10743753
you don't. You could make it tiltable, but it's easier just to build on a slight tilt.
>>tumble
if they can achieve a nice clean separation it shouldn't tumble much.
>>10743807
problem? It's probably cheaper than gun launch.

[Anonymous No.10743862]

>>10743064
asteroid benis :DDDDD

[Anonymous No.10743897]

>>10743064
>>10743068
>>10743070
>>10743071
Bennu looks like it has some pretty sharp rocks, this could make mining difficult. Carbonaceous chrondites like Bennu and Ryugu are a pretty attractive target for mining. Right now the main stuff that's worth mining is water, but there's also carbon and nitrogen that are attractive too. All of these can be used as propellant. Water is nice initially because it's easy to extract and we can ship it back by shooting some of our water out fast as hot steam. Problem is that eventually we need to turn it into H2 and O2, and H2 don't store well. So eventually it may make sense to extract that carbon to make methane. But right now there's a pretty damn good case for water. Like we could get 100 metric tons of water with a single falcon 9 launch to cislunar space. That more than the falcon 9 can even launch to LEO. This could save NASA on the order of hundreds of billions of dollars. So right now the current plan for mining asteroid is to wrap them in a bag, shine concentrated sunlight on a bit of rock so intense it causes it to break apart, we then get water out by condensing it in the bag. But bennu looks like it could be pretty sharp. This might make it hard to put in a bag.

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/niac_sercel_phase_i_final_report_tagged.pdf

[Anonymous No.10744046]

>>10743053
when there is no more corruption in the Russian government

[Anonymous No.10744049]

>>10743202
I thought it was the battery on the Blok-DM upper stage. Even more amusing, the delay into July also pushes this particular Proton past its warranty period!

[Anonymous No.10744076]

>>10743629
>N-IIGR

[Anonymous No.10744086]

>>10744076

[Anonymous No.10744225]

the braptor was giving me confidence in the rest of the grain silo project, it's too bad SN05 got shredded

did spacex end up determining how much damage the tether test did?

[Anonymous No.10744400]

So they blew up another raptor. Time to reconsider merlin powered BFR.

[Anonymous No.10744433]

>>10744400
SN6 will be ready soon, and Raptor production will only accelerate

They will solve the issues sooner or later

[Anonymous No.10744442]

How do we fix this one?

[Anonymous No.10744544]

>>10744442
Just let reentry heating do the job

[Anonymous No.10744647]

>>10744046
Then they will drop that useless pile of junk and start actually doing something

>>10744049
Yeah the initial reports were unclear. I wondered myself what primary batteries are for in a several years long mission, they make more sense in a rocket stage.

[Anonymous No.10744655]

>>10744400
That would be OTRAG territory

[Anonymous No.10744662]

>>10743730
It's more like this

[Anonymous No.10744763]

Mr. Steven is now Ms. Tree
https://www.clickorlando.com/news/space-news/spacexs-rocket-nose-catcher-has-a-new-name

>WKMG: Did we ever learn the meaning behind Mr. Steven’s namesake?
>Cornwell: Yes! The name Mr. Steven is nothing to do with SpaceX and wasn't picked by them. Mr. Steven is named after Steven Miguez, father of the SeaTran Marine CEO Blake Miguez. If Guice Offshore really did buy the ship then the name change is very sensible. I don't think that anybody would keep a multimillion-dollar purchase named after the former owner.
At least it wasn't some kind of gender equality bullshit. I guess.

[Anonymous No.10744766]

>>10744763
naming a vessel after a man is basically heresy anyway
bad luck, you know

[Anonymous No.10744771]

>>10744049
>>10744647
No it was the primary battery on the Spektr-RG itself. They've been used instead of secondary ones because they needed extra power density due to the large size of the telescope, and the usage of primary batteries was deemed safe since the spacecraft is not supposed to go inside Earth shadow while orbiting L2. (what about some kind of emergency though?..)

What happened was the upper stage turning one of the batteries on prematurely due to an error in the flight plan, so it just discharged while still being on the pad.

[Anonymous No.10744786]

>>10744771
Also, primary batteries are located outside the spacecraft since the platform is unpressurized, so the replacement should not take long.

[Anonymous No.10744796]

>>10743055
My penis can predict when V-2 bombs drop

[Anonymous No.10744801]

>>10743718
this is fucking retarded guys

[Anonymous No.10744806]

>>10744771
>the spacecraft is not supposed to go inside Earth shadow while orbiting L2 (what about some kind of emergency though?..)
With its orbit it shouldn't be a problem, pic related, axis are in kilometers. You can't get stuck in the shadow at L2 since it's not a stable point.

[Anonymous No.10744810]

>>10743897
>too sharp for a bag
Nah, it'd obviously be a kevlar bag because it has the best tensile, strength to weight ratio, and thermal resistance characteristics of all commonly produced materials, and kevlar is known for its very good resistance to abrasion and cuts as well.

Regardless, you wouldn't bag an entire asteroid the size of Bennu, you'd pluck rocks off of the surface and put them into a bag to process, then place the dry rocks into orbit of the main asteroid, effectively making an artificial asteroid moon. You then continue to take rocks from the original asteroid, extract what you're extracting, and add the dry/depleted material to the moon, until the moon becomes the main body in the system and you eventually process the entire asteroid.

[Anonymous No.10744812]

>>10744225
>it's too bad SN05 got shredded
good data for making better engines
>how much damage the tether test did?
apparently none, at least to the hopper.

[Anonymous No.10744813]

>>10744400
No one ever considered Merlin powered BFR. If Raptor doesn't work then BFR is dead in the water until they develop a new high performance engine. Not to worry though, because Raptor is working fine, they just keep pushing the engines to 110% until something breaks, then redesigning the part that breaks so that the next version can go to 115%.

[Anonymous No.10744815]

>>10744806
Additionally, they designed the station keeping schedule to reduce the possibility of inadvertently crossing the shadow to practically zero.
http://www.kiam1.rssi.ru/~ivan/SPRG-ru.html
there are also example orbits on that page, which you can import into something like GMAT and run some simulations

[Anonymous No.10744818]

>>10744655
OTRAGeous

[Anonymous No.10744820]

>>10744813
this, Merlin doens't have the performance to make starship work

[Anonymous No.10744923]

>>10742778
how can I make a strong get fuel at home?

[Anonymous No.10744982]

>>10744820
Why wouldn't it work for leo-lunar shuttle or even expendable one way only mars transport? The tanks might have to be redesigned and naturally engine count increased, but... what magic prevents it from working?
Kerosene doesn't work in space?

[Anonymous No.10745051]

>>10744982
it doesn't have the ISP to get enough payload to LEO or something
the way Starship is designed they decided to build the best engine ever made and let that soak up all the other inefficiencies

[Anonymous No.10745063]

>>10744982
Kerosene freezes in space.

[Anonymous No.10745065]

>>10744442
I love this trashcan piece of shit mostly but this makes me cringe hard as fuck, like do these niggers not have tape measures?

[Anonymous No.10745074]

>>10745063
>doesn't understand thermodynamics

[Anonymous No.10745081]

>>10744442
it seems they're doing it purely for the lulz at this point

[Anonymous No.10745110]

>>10744442
>Here's your orbital re entry vehicle bro

[Anonymous No.10745177]

Why dont they just build like the farmers build the grain bins?
They are building top first and lifting the whole thing up then attatching the bottom.
https://youtu.be/ywBV6M7VOFU

[Anonymous No.10745180]

>>10745177
4:05

[Anonymous No.10745240]

Been under a rock for the past week.
What happened to SN5? Last I heard it was done and ready to ship, but now its dead?

[Anonymous No.10745243]

>>10745240
the keep burning up engines, apparently
probably on purpose

[Anonymous No.10745313]

>>10744442
duct tape

[Anonymous No.10745346]

>>10744442
just add another section.

[Anonymous No.10745372]

>>10745240
>>10745243
I don’t think their blowing up engines just for the sake of it, considering SN-5 was repaired multiple times before being pronounced deceased.

[Anonymous No.10745389]

>>10745372
this is my hypothesis: if the objective was "get some engines ready for the hopper" then they wouldn't be breaking them

[Anonymous No.10745395]

>>10745389
the build rate is supposed to be what, one a week right now?

[Anonymous No.10745403]

>>10744442
Make sure this side points up during reentry and it should be mostly fine.

[Anonymous No.10745539]

>>10745389
i'm worried guys...

[Anonymous No.10745542]

>>10745539
I'm sorry anon, but this is a no-frogposting zone, I'm going to have to ask you to leave

[Anonymous No.10745546]

oh nononono

[Anonymous No.10745549]

>>10745542
is that a boy or a girl?

[Anonymous No.10745550]

>>10745549
both

[Anonymous No.10745553]

>>10745546
Long March 5 and Long March 11 are both having serious troubles right now
hopefully they can get it sorted out soon and give America the kick in the pants they need

[Anonymous No.10745574]

>>10745546
Been expecting that.

The Chinese space agency works at a glacial speed, i expect the Long March one to become their version of SLS and private space companies to go full SpaceX on their asses.

[Anonymous No.10745577]

>>10745574
Long March 9 of course.

[Anonymous No.10745627]

>>10745549
yes

[Anonymous No.10745698]

>>10745574
They are slow and underfunded, but mostly on time. Their 25 year program just slipped by 1 year, not every state agency can boast something like this these times. I agree that CALT is too much of the bureaucratic hell for LM9 though.

[Anonymous No.10745714]

>>10745698
>Their 25 year program just slipped by 1 year
lmao

[Anonymous No.10745732]

>>10745714
Well it was an entire piloted program from scratch to approximately 2ng gen Salyuts, plus a renewal of their LV line, without space race budgets (it was a completely different economy back in 1992)

[Anonymous No.10745734]

>>10745714
meanwhile, NASA kept redrawing concepts for almost half a century

[Anonymous No.10745741]

>>10744442
it's close enough, it'll work fine

[Anonymous No.10745773]

>>10742778
>he trusted the mason

[Anonymous No.10745781]

>>10745698
Linkspace has demonstrated Grasshopper tech from 2012, though their landing rocket is planned to be 1/20th the size of a Falcon 9 this whole thing will give them the knowhow and software needed to just scale up their small sat launcher to a full F9, and beyond. That's pretty much everything but the Long March 9 that you can throw into a dumpster by 2025 or so.

[Anonymous No.10745784]

Why did they pretend to be halfway to the moon when they were clearly in LEO?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrFFbyuQqt4

[Anonymous No.10745801]

>>10745784
What makes you think that the Apollo astronauts were pretending? What makes you think that the video was taken at LEO?

[Anonymous No.10745802]

>>10744544
Exactly, just make a mold underneath and let it melt. Then it'll look perfect for photos right after landing.

[Anonymous No.10745811]

>>10745784
What makes you think the Soviets would have kept silent when the class enemy tries to fake something like that?

[Anonymous No.10745818]

>>10743240

[Anonymous No.10745821]

>>10745811
My favorite "theory" was that the Soviets were bribed with grain. Not because it has any weight, it's probably the weakest, but because it's so silly.

[Anonymous No.10745825]

>>10745801
It isn't a matter of debate, anon.
Does Earth stick out on one side?
Do gigantic cloud formations cover the entire planet?
No continents?
It's clearly a shot taken through a window.
THEY LIED

[Anonymous No.10745832]

>>10745811
It doesn't matter what the Soviets did.
This is not Earth from halfway to the moon.

[Anonymous No.10745837]

>>10745825
>It isn't a matter of debate, anon.
Correct, the validity of the Apollo moon landings have been confirmed for decades.

>Does Earth stick out on one side?
It's due to the night side of the Earth covering the part of we can't see. You can clearly see the terminator.

>Do gigantic cloud formations cover the entire planet?
No, and the video shows that. You can see parts of the Earth under the clouds.

>No continents?
Apollo 11 could be looking at the Pacific ocean which covers a large part of the Earth's surface. Also, the land masses could be obscured by the clouds.

>It's clearly a shot taken through a window.
Well, yes. How else would the Apollo 11 crew take a picture of the Earth from inside the capsule?

>THEY LIED
Who lied? About what? Are you talking about the moon landings?

The Apollo moon landings happened. The amount of evidence for it is overwhelming. Plus, you conveniently ignore this >>10745811 which is the single largest piece of evidence for Apollo. The Soviets couldn't be in on it, and would expose the whole thing.

[Anonymous No.10745840]

another day, another troll for the /sfg/ to feed
nice job faggots

[Anonymous No.10745844]

>>10745832
>It doesn't matter what the Soviets did.
If the Apollo moon landings were faked, then the Soviets would've known. If the Soviets knew that the moon landings were faked, then they would have exposed it to the world. The Soviets didn't do this, instead they backed up the fact that the moon landings happen. Ergo, the moon landings happened.

[Anonymous No.10745846]

>>10745818
it's better than a dildo shape at least

[Anonymous No.10745850]

>>10745840
just report it and report them
were it not for /sci/ being the most brainlet board past /b/, I'd figure it was a samefag

[Anonymous No.10745851]

>>10745832
looks like earth to me you dumb fuck

[Anonymous No.10745852]

>>10745844
stop feeding it you twat

[Anonymous No.10745854]

>>10745837
They lied about being halfway to the moon.
It's a fucking window.
You can see the rim.
It's not perfectly round like in most shots of the Earth.
If they lied about this, what else did they lie about?

[Anonymous No.10745859]

>>10745844
I'm not claiming that.
You're the one saying I'm claiming that.
I'm just asking a simple question.
Why do the window stunt?

[Anonymous No.10745862]

>>10745818
Should I be worried about what my bathroom is up to?

[Anonymous No.10745863]

>>10745846
it's objectively worse than the stainless steel phallus of doom and you know it

[Anonymous No.10745865]

Guys, stop feeding the troll. He just wants people to argue with so he'll feel superior. Just report him.

For those who seriously doubt that America has landed on the moon, I suggest that you browse through this site (http://www.clavius.org/).). It covers some of the core aspects of the moon landing conspiracy. It doesn't cover the fact that if the moon landings were fake, then the Soviets would've exposed it long ago, but that is such a massive problem with the conspiracy that it doesn't really need an explanation.

[Anonymous No.10745869]

>>10745865
>Just report him.
Not even the troll, but honestly kys.

[Anonymous No.10745879]

>>10745865
I'm not a troll.
I'm just asking a questions that should be asked.
Maybe they went later but couldn't do it during Apollo 11.
They lost the telemetry and the tapes.
Now astronauts are on record saying with SLS and Orion we can "finally" go beyond LEO.
And the whole 666 days in space shit with the freemason compass logo.
Freemason astronauts.
Drowning astronauts using snorkels in space.
How many coincidences will it takes before you realize that something is off here?

[Anonymous No.10745880]

>>10745865
Already did
>>10745869
fag

[Anonymous No.10745882]

>>10745879
Fuck off retard

[Anonymous No.10745885]

>>10745880
Why the homophobia?

[Anonymous No.10745910]

>>10745885
that low effort shitpost died months ago, and for good reason

[Anonymous No.10745929]

>>10745714
For others, anything longer than 5 years is impossible to do at all

[Anonymous No.10745946]

[Anonymous No.10745986]

>>10745051
Fiddling with dv calculator shows merlins cause payload to be near identical to non-vacuum raptor version. There are implications beyond that however courtesy of the much higher density of kerosene so I don't know how it'll look if fully redesigned around it. At the very least you can pack more of it inside the same volume but that naturally means even more engines below. Doesn't seem that crazy to be honest, and if the raptors continue to have serious hiccups this could be an option. Cheap fully reusable rocket is incredibly valuable and useful thing even if it doesn't have 150 tons to LEO + fuel almost readily available on the surface of Mars.

[Anonymous No.10746066]

So my parts list for this N2O thruster is getting filled out. I have found parts for the chamber+throat, injector plate, N2O tank and plumbing, and the silver wire for the catalyst. Am I missing anything?

[Anonymous No.10746094]

>>10746066
you need a turbopump and turbine

[Anonymous No.10746121]

>>10746094
No he doesn’t, a pressure-fed cycle will surmise because you don’t need to be a machinist to build one. >>10746066 you need an inert gas such as helium to pressurise the tanks and a mechanism to pump it in.

[Anonymous No.10746227]

>>10745946
Shiny as fuck

[Anonymous No.10746308]

>>10746094
This thing will be pressure fed, so no pumps (yet).

>>10746121
I thought N2O self pressurizes if stored above ~40 bar at room temperature? Would something like this even need a pressurant gas?
https://www.oreillyauto.com/detail/b/nos-4458/performance-16477/fuel-system-16571/nitrous-system-parts---components-16730/nitrous-oxide-injection-system-kit-12955/cb98e4c4e122/nos-nitrous-oxide-injection-system-kit/02120nos/4541544?q=Nitrous+Oxide+Injector+Plate

[Anonymous No.10746466]

>Manber: I’m worried that NASA is so excited about commercial LEO that it’s expecting billions of dollars. It won’t be.
>https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1142145511694245888
how do we make LEO space stations profitable?

[Anonymous No.10746491]

>>10746466
>how do we make LEO space stations profitable?
Hard to tell since people have been trying to make space profitable for years and it hasn't really happened except for some niche markets. I doubt it'll be space tourism though, since the ticket prices are so expensive that the market will be extremely limited. Maybe use a LEO station as a bus station to fit lunar destined payloads to tugs to send out to the moon and beyond (for a fee of course). That way a payload could be sent to space in advance of a transfer window and get checked and ready in LEO before heading out. The payload owner wouldn't have to worry about missing the launch window due to weather or other issues, their payload could be tested in space before it goes off on it's own, and if it doesn't work then it can be sent back to Earth or even repaired in space. I'm just spitballing though.

[Anonymous No.10746497]

>>10746466
How about make an actual space hotel instead of the shitty cramped quarters the ISS has?

[Anonymous No.10746509]

>>10746497
That would require either Bigelow getting it shit together and actually get something done with their hardware, or a big rocket capable of sending a Skylab sized module.

[Anonymous No.10746514]

>>10746509
Those are also too small. We need actual in-space construction.

[Anonymous No.10746520]

>>10746514
>We need actual in-space construction.
Considering that no one has really tried it at all suggests that it may be too expensive to figure out right now (compared to what can be immediately gained from it). There seriously needs to be some real research on it though. In-space construction and in-space refueling can solve lot's of spaceflight issues. Such as allowing smaller cheaper rockets to do big missions without needing a giant rocket to carry everything.

[Anonymous No.10746551]

>>10746520
>compared to what can be immediately gained from it
That's literally how you prevent further problem solving. Capitalists literally just wait around for people with ideas to show up. They already have the money. It's not like they're incentivized to figure out how to use it for what they would want in a more advanced world.

[Anonymous No.10746637]

>>10742844
Rockets explode during testing.

[Anonymous No.10746677]

jigs aplenty

[Anonymous No.10746682]

>>10746677
This one looks MUCH better than the dumpster fire at Boca chica

[Anonymous No.10746685]

>>10746677
which one is this?

[Anonymous No.10746687]

>>10746677
And this is the "orbital" hopper? What will it test exactly?

[Anonymous No.10746688]

>>10746685
Florida, you can tell because there's a jungle instead of a swamp

[Anonymous No.10746693]

>>10746682
Memes aside why does the Boca Chica one look like such shit?

[Anonymous No.10746698]

>>10746693
I've heard that the exposure of the salty air, due to being close to the sea, is the cause.

[Anonymous No.10746699]

>>10746693
first one

[Anonymous No.10746868]

>>10746677
Jesus that's shiny

[Anonymous No.10746877]

>>10745946
Looks nice

[Anonymous No.10746881]

>>10746693
Different construction methods, it looks like the good looking one at cocoa uses an external jig for the segments whereas the one at Boca Chica uses an internal jig. An external jig means your exterior finish is molded against the jig making it look much nicer.

I know nothing about it though, this is just a guess but I think I'm pretty close.

[Anonymous No.10746894]

>>10746698
Doubtful, all that would do is make the exterior a little dull, if that since it's stainless. It's a clear difference in the way it's built, something like

>>10746881

Is probably the reason.

[Anonymous No.10747245]

>>10742947
That's actually a software development approach and isn't done by other companies for a good reason.
They are not "pushing innovation" at lightspeed.
Name ONE fucking ONE groundbreaking technology that SpaceX developed.... oh there is none?
So they are barely getting low tech rockets to work?
Okay then friendo.

[Anonymous No.10747251]

>>10747245
>Name ONE fucking ONE groundbreaking technology that SpaceX developed
Besides reusable rockets? If someone else did it first I'd be intrigued to know more about that.

[Anonymous No.10747268]

10747245
Just fuck off already

[Anonymous No.10747286]

>>10746687
Hopping from orbits, presumably.

[Anonymous No.10747292]

>>10747251
>Besides reusable rockets?
Reusability is a technology?
Name a technological breakthrough.
Landing rockets and reusing engines has been done before, nobody does it because it is not economically feasible not because no one else can do it.
Take Musks cock out of your mouth and name 1 groundbreaking technology that SpaceX developed.

[Anonymous No.10747295]

>>10747268
Shizo I just visited /sci for the first time in months, you need help.
Why don't you educate me by proving me wrong other than being a butthurt fanboy?

[Anonymous No.10747296]

>>10747251
>being this stupid

[Anonymous No.10747308]

Don't reply to him jesus christ.

[Anonymous No.10747311]

>>10747308
>being this retarded

[Anonymous No.10747362]

>>10747292
>Reusability is a technology?
Yeah
>>10747296
Elaborate anon, it didn't exist before and now it does, therefore it's a new development. Considering the reduction in cost per launch I'd say it's significant.
Listen, I know you guys want to shitpost/b8 anons who suck Elon's dick and all, but at least think about your shitposts before you make them. You're /tv/-tier, get better queers.

[Anonymous No.10747366]

>>10747308
My bad, he won't get another (you)

[Anonymous No.10747426]

>>10746466
>how do we make LEO space stations profitable?
redirect a fraction of ISS budget towards them and let commercial space companies do their magic

[Anonymous No.10747442]

>>10747295
>Shizo I just visited /sci for the first time in months
yes, and we remember you, now fuck off, reddit troll

[Anonymous No.10747923]

>>10747362
>Yeah
No it isn't, it is a purely economic action.
>Elaborate anon, it didn't exist before and now it does, therefore it's a new development
Space Shuttle?
Capsules?
We have reused stuff before stop lying out of your ass.
So Elon'S dicksucker squad can not name a single groundbreaking invention by SpaceX great.
Now keep insulting me, with every ad-hominem you prove that you have no arguments and that you are driven by emotion not reason or facts.

[Anonymous No.10747927]

>>10747366
Yes please daddy tell who I am allowed to answer I almost argued about something but being part of a hivemind is so much easier.
Pathetic loser.

[Anonymous No.10747952]

>>10747923
>Space Shuttle?
>Capsules?
Neither are rockets

[Anonymous No.10748048]

>>10747927
do you actually have fun talking to him?

[Anonymous No.10748054]

On June 24, SpaceX plans to launch its third >Falcon Heavy rocket— the world's most powerful operational launch system — and send 24 different satellites into orbit.
>One of the satellites will carry 152 metal capsules packed with human ashes.
>A company called Celestis arranged the "funeral flight" and charges upwards of $5,000 to fly 1 gram of "participant" cremains into orbit.
>Celestis has arranged the launch of cremains from engineers, astronauts, authors, and a even Star Trek actor.

[Anonymous No.10748057]

>On June 24, SpaceX plans to launch its third Falcon Heavy rocket— the world's most powerful operational launch system — and send 24 different satellites into orbit.
>One of the satellites will carry 152 metal capsules packed with human ashes.
>A company called Celestis arranged the "funeral flight" and charges upwards of $5,000 to fly 1 gram of "participant" cremains into orbit.
>Celestis has arranged the launch of cremains from engineers, astronauts, authors, and a even Star Trek actor.

[Anonymous No.10748156]

>>10748048
it's the same guy responding to himself to spam the thread
report them both

[Anonymous No.10748167]

>>10747952
Exactly they are even more complex.

[Anonymous No.10748171]

>>10748156
Do you really believe what you are saying?
I am really sorry but you are actually insane.
Get help, schizo.

[Anonymous No.10748177]

>>10748167
looking forward to Starship, succeed or fail it'll only be the second real datapoint on combination upper stage/reusable spacecraft

[Anonymous No.10748188]

10748171

[Anonymous No.10748227]

>humans build a flyable bomb the size of a skyscraper
THE AUDACITY!

[Anonymous No.10748229]

>>10748227
it's less "flyable" than it is "humans built a bomb the size of a skyscraper and then rode it on a column of fire to the moon"

[Anonymous No.10748316]

>>10748156
No it, wasn't.

[Anonymous No.10748320]

>>10747923
What a needlessly angry little man. Go back to shitposting /tv/ loser.

[Anonymous No.10748376]

>>10748229
THEY DARE?

[Anonymous No.10748519]

>>10748057
Imagine polluting our orbits with sand from dead people.

[Anonymous No.10748526]

>>10748519
it really depends on what orbit they go in, with any luck it'll all deorbit soon enough

[Anonymous No.10748645]

Hybrid engine exhaust is GROSS!
https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/fuel-product-spaceshipone

[Anonymous No.10748656]

>>10748645
>rubber and nitrous oxide
no shit it's going to be nasty as hell, who the fuck thought that was a good idea

[Anonymous No.10748659]

>>10748656
IIRC, it's a pretty safe propellant combination in terms of how explosive it is and how easy it is to get and handle.

[Anonymous No.10748680]

>>10747245
Landing rockets on earth? What other company/agency has done that? That's right. They're the ONLY company/entity/agency in the entire world to have a retro-propulsive landing rocket.

[Anonymous No.10748683]

>>10748680
that's wrong tho

[Anonymous No.10748685]

>>10748683
Name one

[Anonymous No.10748703]

>>10748685
Blue Origin New Shepard (an attempt at a manned reusable sounding rocket, but they've ended up at man-capable refurbishable sounding rocket instead)
here's the list from wikipedia of VTVL rocketry
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VTVL

[Anonymous No.10748711]

>>10748703
they're forgetting the flying bedstead lunar excursion module testbed

[Anonymous No.10748713]

>>10748703
All of them tested and failed. Blue Origin has not landed a rocket from space only sub-orbital testing.

[Anonymous No.10748717]

>>10748713
you're moving the goalposts, also New Shephard passed the Karman Line, which officially makes it a VTVL sounding rocket that has been to space

[Anonymous No.10748726]

>>10748717
Sure, why not. Lets give New Shephard that achievement, they're the only other company that's actively developing this technology and has a chance of developing this technology in the next decade or so.

Even account for New Shephard, SpaceX is still leading the retropropulsive rocket landing department. That's innovation.

[Anonymous No.10748759]

>>10748726
the first stage of Falcon 9 is an amazing thing, yes

[Anonymous No.10748762]

>>10748713
>Blue Origin has not landed a rocket from space
Just like SpaceX the first stage is suborbital.

[Anonymous No.10748830]

>>10748526
they're packed inside of a satellite

[Anonymous No.10748888]

>>10746497
i think thats what bigelow is doing / hoping for with their commercial astronaut program.
>launch a big commercial module
>attach it to the ISS
>use commercial astronauts to manage it
>get tourists
>profit

[Anonymous No.10748890]

>>10748888
they'd be better off on their own with a station in a more sensible orbit

[Anonymous No.10748983]

>>10748890
speaking of sensible orbits, a little known fact is that equatorial LEO has an almost Earthlike radiation environment

http://space.alglobus.net/papers/RadiationPaper.pdf

in practice this could mean huge mass savings for any space colony

[Anonymous No.10749021]

>>10748983
Too much debris though

[Anonymous No.10749033]

>>10748983
is a dogleg for equitorial LEO possible from KSC?

[Anonymous No.10749079]

>>10749021
a concern but not a showstopper

[Anonymous No.10749087]

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1142890265369202688

based

[Anonymous No.10749094]

>>10749087
SOON

[Anonymous No.10749096]

>>10749087
HOP WHEN

[Anonymous No.10749099]

>>10749096
a note: texas is what happens when you try to clean up your welds
Florida is what it looks like when you leave them looking ugly

[Anonymous No.10749114]

Elon confirmed for based ethnonationalist, too

dirty Earthers go home

[Anonymous No.10749124]

>>10749096
Texas BTFO

[Anonymous No.10749181]

fuck elonnites, we will create our own martian empire

[Anonymous No.10749199]

>>10749181
You and what rocket?

[Anonymous No.10749200]

Nobody's leaving for mars without UN approval. The loss for science from doing so and the risk of microbial contamination is so severe it is criminal so it's not happening no matter how many scrap silos you start welding. I'm not that worried anymore seeing the results of these... efforts.

[Anonymous No.10749212]

>>10749200
>Nobody's leaving for mars without UN approval.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, thanks for the laugh anon

[Anonymous No.10749213]

>>10749200
the UN is powerless

[Anonymous No.10749219]

>>10749213
>us
>russia
>china
>"powerless"

[Anonymous No.10749227]

your resident SpaceX lunch thread poster here, reminding you to get launch snacks for the FH launch tomorrow. Thread will be up in 6 hours.

[Anonymous No.10749249]

>>10749199
we'll take spacex and establish our own nation when we arrive

[Anonymous No.10749251]

>>10749219
>He doesn’t see the irony of listing three nations that ignore UN rules and regulations whenever they feel like it as proof of the organisation’s strength...

[Anonymous No.10749253]

I'm going to establish the Technocracy of Mars and you cannot stop me

[Anonymous No.10749267]

fuck the terrans space war now

[Anonymous No.10749322]

>>10749253
I can't wait until Elon declares himself Fabricator General of Mars

[Anonymous No.10749329]

HOP
WHEN

[Anonymous No.10749332]

>>10749219
>US
>stopping a US company

[Anonymous No.10749365]

>>10749322
Other way around - we will call the future leaders of Mars "The Elon".

[Anonymous No.10749383]

>>10749365
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHCHEykUxP4

[Anonymous No.10749932]

>>10746491
>I doubt it'll be space tourism though, since the ticket prices are so expensive that the market will be extremely limited.
A good chunk of the price so far has been getting a seat on Soyuz. If Bigelow can get something up and SpaceX ends up with enough "used" Crew Dragons, the price of orbital space tourism should go down.
Also, Virgin has been really delayed with their spaceplane, and Blue Origin may soon run suborbital flights on their little rocket too. So even the "cheap" space tourism market still hasn't begun yet.

[Anonymous No.10749967]

>>10749932
Personally I think the suborbital market with BO and Virgin is going to fall flat on its face, still pretty expensive and you only get a few minutes in space. That's fucking boring, I don't think it will take off until you can make orbit and stay up there for an extended period. I only see this happening with BFR because a seat even on a used Dragon is going to be expensive as fuck and there is nowhere to go except ISS and they can't really sustain many people there. A BFR on the other hand is a hotel ready to go, you launch a few dozen rich snobs up there with nice big rooms, cocktail bar, professional catering etc... Cruise around the earth for a few weeks and come back, now THAT will sell like fucking hotcakes.

[Anonymous No.10749982]

>>10749114
Indeed he is right, if mars has life it belongs to Martians. So in the mean time all humans should be forbidden from Mars to prevent contamination

[Anonymous No.10750028]

>>10749932
>SpaceX ends up with enough "used" Crew Dragons, the price of orbital space tourism should go down.
Any projections on the expected prices?

[Anonymous No.10750062]

>>10750028
depends entirely on the amount of places tourists could go to

[Anonymous No.10750093]

>>10749096
The texas one actually looks more solid. No wrinkles.

[Anonymous No.10750117]

>>10750093
It used to have shitloads of wrinkles, they must have smoothed them out, they will probably do the same on the Florida one.

[Anonymous No.10750135]

FH thread ready to go, but the bozos haven't posted the press kit or stream link yet. Will stick it up at T-24 regardless

[Anonymous No.10750140]

>>10750135
Based launch thread poster

[Anonymous No.10750211]

>>10748762
Holy shit never thought of that

[Anonymous No.10750212]

FH launch thread:
>10750199

[Anonymous No.10750215]

>>10750212
One fucking job

[Anonymous No.10750217]

FH launch thread:
>>10750199

[Anonymous No.10750347]

How (if at all) will Moon landing denialists adjust their frame when the private German mission returns new imagery of the Apollo 17 site next year?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PTScientists

[Anonymous No.10750370]

>>10748680
Yep, that's wrong, and the first stage also doesn't itself go orbital or even "reach space", but New Shepard barely goes anywhere. It's a fucking carnival ride.

[Anonymous No.10750373]

>>10750370
okay, it's late, yep that first stage reaches space for sure

[Anonymous No.10750374]

>>10750370
just a note, tomorrow's ASDS landing will be 1200+km offshore. It's being lobbed really far

[Anonymous No.10750435]

Elon tweets:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1143019549492744203
"Raptor liberated its oxygen turbine stator (appears to be mechanical, not metal combustion failure), so we need to update the design & replace some parts. Production is ramping exponentially, though. SN6 almost done. Aiming for an engine every 12 hours by end of year."


https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1143022645585358848
"Full year production is usually ~70% of peak daily rate, so 500/year. Still, non-trivial at 100,000 tons of thrust/year."

now we know what happened to SN 5

[Anonymous No.10750442]

>>10750435
>Aiming for an engine every 12 hours

[Anonymous No.10750444]

>>10750442
only 13 SS+SH's worth of raptors per year. Not that much, considering you need *eight* trips to LEO/MEO to refuel a starship for the full 150t to the moon.

[Anonymous No.10750446]

>>10750444
nice trips

[Anonymous No.10750449]

>>10750444
With the kind of reuse the system is being designed for, 13 a year isn't bad. Those ships/booster will stack up quick.

Also, production goal was 500/yr by the end of THIS year alone.

[Anonymous No.10750451]

>>10750449
true. Merlin is only doing one a day, or at least they were at one point

[Anonymous No.10750455]

Raptor facts:
-each one costs more than $2,000,000 currently
-for volume production, less than $200,000 (hopefully)
"much to be proven"
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1143026166112108544

[Anonymous No.10750495]

>>10750444
>More than one fully reusable starship per month

That sounds like a fucking lot to me mate, I don't think they will be even able to build the rest of the rocket to keep pace with that level of production.

[Anonymous No.10750521]

>>10749365
lol wtf

[Anonymous No.10750527]

>>10750455
Less than 10% of the current price, which isn't necessarily close to 2 million
it could be 25 million

[Anonymous No.10750591]

>>10749219

That's the point. "The UN" is a meaningless cipher (which incompetently deploys rape-troops to various conflict zones by the way) in which relevant powers participate. It is stupidly childish to suppose that the UN controls anything at all, since the UN is only a very recent and transient diplomatic body representing the world's states. Rather, all that really matters is how the world's most powerful states choose to interact with each other.

[Anonymous No.10750777]

From NSF:

“I have been closely monitoring Chinese spaceflight fans forums recently and I have to confess that I simply don't know how long will it take to fix the problem. Rumors are saying that there is no simple fix because it involves the complete redesign of YF-77 LOx turbopump assembly. Another more recent rumor is that a Chinese engineering team has been sent to Italy for technical exchange, some speculate they are possibly seeking technical advice and help regarding the YF-77 LOx turbopump issue (because Italy, more specifically Avio S.p.A., had the expertise in designing the LOx turbopump of Vulcain LH2/LOx engine for Ariane 5 and 6)
source: https://tieba.baidu.com/p/6169950596
Some Chinese spaceflight fans even go as far as recommending the moving of the Chinese space station core module to be launched on Ariane 5 if LM-5 won't be ready on time, because the lifting capacity and fairing size of Ariane 5 are considered well adapted to launching CSS core module, and ITAR only restricts western parts to be launched on Chinese rockets but not vice versa. It might be a solution if the Chinese government wants to launch their space station on time even if LM-5 is not ready. However I personally don't think this will happen because launching core module on Ariane 5 would be a great blow to their national prestige and image/independence of their space program, and will undoubtedly face significant political resistance.”

[Anonymous No.10750778]

>>10742778
Earth is flat

[Anonymous No.10750782]

>>10750777
This is in regards to the LM-5 delays btw

[Anonymous No.10750844]

>>10750777
Well it seems the SLS might win the moon race after all...

[Anonymous No.10750865]

>>10750444
>considering you need *eight* trips to LEO/MEO to refuel a starship for the full 150t to the moon.

You can reuse the same propellant tanker for this.

[Anonymous No.10750901]

>>10750777
50c army btfo

[Anonymous No.10750954]

>>10750865
When you need something like 3-6 months to refurbish it it's going to take quite a while to send anything beyond low earth orbit.

[Anonymous No.10750975]

>>10750954
>When you need something like 3-6 months to refurbish it it's going to take quite a while to send anything beyond low earth orbit.

If SpaceX never improves Starship refurbishment to three months, they've failed before they've even begun.

[Anonymous No.10751051]

>>10750954

24 hour turnaround muh nibba

>>10750778

Earth is fat

[Anonymous No.10751058]

>>10750347
They'll just deny that the German mission happened and claim that the company is in on the Jewish/Irish/Sumerian/Alien/Jeff conspiracy in a boring way. Some will try to be less boring and try to pick apart the company and it's evidence ("oh no, this image doesn't fit my arbitrary expectations. it must be fake despite it being consistent with every other piece of evidence on the moon."), but then eventually they'll just dismiss everything because if you take the company's founding date take some numbers and add some back, then you get 666. Completely boring.

[Anonymous No.10751311]

>>10750777
based

[Anonymous No.10751583]

>>10750442
At peak they were doing a Merlin every 24 hours, so it's not THAT ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.10751590]

a moment of silence for Raptor #5
rotor liberation is a nasty way to go

[Anonymous No.10751619]

I'm retarded, it liberated a stator
which is just as bad

[Anonymous No.10751645]

>>10749096
You vs. the guy she tells you not to worry about

[Anonymous No.10751676]

>>10751590
>>10751619
It apparently lasted a whole 2 seconds, of what was supposed to be a 60 second test-firing...

[Anonymous No.10751833]

>>10751058
>because if you take the company's founding date take some numbers and add some back, then you get 666
Kek

[Anonymous No.10751857]

>>10751833
It's true, I saw something in \loq\ the other day where they did A=26 Z=1 just to get something to add up to 666.

[Anonymous No.10751878]

Musk tweeting again, very interesting

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1143195449425321984

seems like turbine blades may be the limiting factor for reusable rocketry?

[Anonymous No.10751888]

>>10751878
is the turbine blade something you could really just weld back together? I was always under the impression that its crystalline structure was important, maybe not the case with merlin?

[Anonymous No.10751910]

Redpill me on plasma engines. Are they a real possibility? I remember that some engineers made one with a length of 8cm that could work in "normal" pressures. Is it possible to make them bigger or is it more viable to use many of these to get the same result?

[Anonymous No.10751925]

>>10751910
VASIMR is not much better than existing ion thrusters, and due to low thrust and requirement for lots of power it is not viable for fast flights. Could be nice for unmanned probes, tough.

[Anonymous No.10751927]

>>10751857
And the fact that their system is arbitrary never comes across their minds. Came across a conspiratard who used some conspiracy numerology site and it had like 10 different settings so you can manipulate any string of letters to get what you want.

[Anonymous No.10752012]

>>10751910
>>10751925
Right, they wanted to put a VASIMR on ISS (I still think they should have just done it instead of pussy-ing around about it), and it would have had to charge up a battery bank for a 15-minute burn because the ISS solar panels don't give enough power. But I think it would have done a fine job of station-keeping even with that.
But yeah, the kind of power it would need to do the accelerate-then-turn-around-to-decelerate meme would be way too much for solar panels alone.

>>10751927
They never stop to think (well that says it right there) about WHY (((they))) would randomly pick one of ten different ways to hide a number that really doesn't do shit anyhow. But it's so important that it just has to be there, and only the conspiratard is smart enough to figure out (((their))) evil plans.

[Anonymous No.10752026]

>>10752012
>They never stop to think (well that says it right there) about WHY (((they))) would randomly pick one of ten different ways to hide a number that really doesn't do shit anyhow. But it's so important that it just has to be there, and only the conspiratard is smart enough to figure out (((their))) evil plans.
The conspiratards usually claim (if they thought this far) that the Jews/Irish/Dolphins/Sumerians intentionally put "clues" everywhere to "test" the population. What the conspiratards fail to realize is that makes their "theory" unfalsifiable because then ANYTHING can be a "test" including evidence against the "theory".

[Anonymous No.10752032]

>>10751925
VASIMR is more universal than Hall effect thrusters because it can trade thrust for Isp. It's also more efficient. MPD thrusters in general are capable of hundreds of newtons, which is enough for fast trajectories without waiting for transfer windows, which is ideal for manned missions.

>>10751910
>Redpill me on plasma engines. Are they a real possibility?
MPDTs have been proven working in 60s, they are nothing new. They aren't being used for main propulsion though. There's also some new tech such as metal-fed plasma thrusters for cubesats. Regarding high-power ones, IIRC Russians have several 40-60kW MPDT models for their nuclear TEM. But TEM future is murky at best, they failed to implement the open-loop droplet radiator, and most likely only the reactor will get done.

[Anonymous No.10752071]

Claiming this thread for the OPA

[Anonymous No.10752096]

here is official Falcon Heavy livestream, you can set a reminder

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxH4CAlhtiQ

[Anonymous No.10752174]

>>10752096
damn, those hours suck for us euro's.
dont feel like waking up for that.

[Anonymous No.10752261]

>>10752096
>7 hours
Can't wait bros

[Anonymous No.10752375]

>>10742778
>"The climate impact of rockets has not really been seriously addressed as yet," Ross, a senior project engineer for civil and commercial launch projects at The Aerospace Corporation in El Segundo, California

>Rocket soot accumulates in the upper stratosphere, where the particles absorb sunlight, Ross said. This accumulation heats the upper stratosphere, changing chemical reaction rates and likely leading to ozone loss, he added.

>A key study focus is the climate impact of major rocket-engine emissions: carbon dioxide, water, black carbon and alumina particles discharged by solid rocket-booster motors.

I bet you didn't think about it

[Anonymous No.10752384]

>>10752375
we need to switch to green propellants like natural gas and away from fuel oil, nasty solid rocket motors, and stuff like nitric acid, nitrous oxide, and the hydrazines

[Anonymous No.10752487]

>>10752375
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMCk4m6DsNg
miniscule compared to the energy and transportation industry

[Anonymous No.10752503]

>>10752384
>natural gas
>literally methane
>green
u wot

[Anonymous No.10752506]

>>10752503
it's a Starship Super Heavy shitpost

[Anonymous No.10752518]

>>10752506
>it's a Starship Super Heavy shitpost
All topics about Muh Environment are shitposts unless they involve the quality of the air we breathe, the water we drink, the plants we eat, or failing any of those three, offer the prospect of equivalent replacements or superior alternatives to the goods and services they want to eliminate in the name of protecting nature. If it reduces access to food, energy, and material, its nothing more than a conspiracy to hurt the United States.

[Anonymous No.10752527]

>>10752375
HTPB is bad for ozone, that's a known problem since 70s

>>10752487
Nah, solids in particular are comparable since it happens directly at the altitude.

[Anonymous No.10752535]

[Anonymous No.10752578]

>>10744442
At first I thought the crane hit too hard and blood is dripping.

[Anonymous No.10752595]

A FUCJKUING GRAIN SILO

[Anonymous No.10752605]

Hmmmm

[Anonymous No.10752607]

>>10752375
there is not a replacement yet for chemical rockets

[Anonymous No.10752626]

>>10752607
http://www.spinlaunch.com/

[Anonymous No.10752628]

>>10752626
what a fucking meme

[Anonymous No.10752629]

>>10752628
it's the best meme

[Anonymous No.10752634]

>>10752629
sbinlauncher

[Anonymous No.10752635]

>>10752607
water rocket

[Anonymous No.10752660]

>>10752635
Water is a chemical.

[Anonymous No.10752661]

>>10752660
water is a liquid

[Anonymous No.10752662]

>>10752535
Wats dis?

[Anonymous No.10752666]

>>10752661
all liquids are chemicals

[Anonymous No.10752668]

>>10752666
but not all chemicals are liquid

[Anonymous No.10752673]

>>10752662
That’s Elon at the Cocoa Starship factory

[Anonymous No.10752676]

>>10752026
Well you kind of need to look out for those Irish fucks

[Anonymous No.10752683]

>>10752071
Belter scum

[Anonymous No.10752686]

>>10752535
Is that Bryan May?

[Anonymous No.10752744]

[Anonymous No.10752810]

>>10752744
Oh Shit, SN6?

[Anonymous No.10752815]

>>10752810
that's Cocao Beach, not Boca Chica
why the fuck would they have a Raptor at all?

[Anonymous No.10752826]

>>10752605
is that the SN 4 fitment test thingy?

[Anonymous No.10752858]

>>10752815
Probably for test fitting purposes. They still have the first couple of raptors lying around, might as well put em to use if they're not going to fly.

[Anonymous No.10753133]

I'm trying to make a rocket engine and I've found some parts for the chamber, throat, and injection plate (at least the beginning of one). My plan was to use a reducer (with a diameter ratio of at least 3) as the chamber and throat, and then a large end cap for what will be an injector.

https://www.mcmaster.com/2161k23
https://www.mcmaster.com/45525K589

However, they are a tad expensive. I've tried looking for cheaper ones, but I can't find anything. Can you guys help?

[Anonymous No.10753288]

Elon giving Apollo 11 the credit it deserves. Damn, I'm super glad I got to see it in IMAX!

[Anonymous No.10753292]

>>10753133
make one on a lathe. Would be a fun machining project if you're new to it all.... trust me, you will need to make some chips eventually if you're building a rocket engine

[Anonymous No.10753402]

>>10753292
I've done lathework before, but I personally don't have a lathe and the only lathe I have access to is a university one that I'm sure only allows student design team related work. Plus I'm graduating by the end of this year so my time with it is limited.

[Anonymous No.10753522]

holy fuck he's so autistic
https://twitter.com/RoseLeoMusk/status/1143352787297873921

[Anonymous No.10753578]

botanical centers onboard Starship confirmed
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1143357504782503936

[Anonymous No.10753672]

By the way, the first phase of the lift of Insight's mole housing was done recently, apparently the thing has created a fuckhuge hole instead of going in cleanly.

https://i.imgur.com/TZLi6UO.jpg

[Anonymous No.10753734]

>>10753672
lol
>design probe that needs 10m of rock-free dirt to pound sensor into
>fail to give it wheels in case it lands somewhere shitty

[Anonymous No.10754512]

>>10752661

Wat is love? Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.

[Anonymous No.10754770]

>>10753672
what a piece of shit

[Anonymous No.10754820]

>>10753672
What happens now? Can they reposition it and try another spot?

[Anonymous No.10754856]

>>10754820
Nope it's done, they only got one shot

>Our speshul payloads cost a gorillion dollars because we use billion dollar throwaway vehicles so we need to overengineer them as fuck with bloated contractors
>Yeah this mole that needs ten metres of soft soil with no rocks on FUCKING MARS only gets one shot lol

[Anonymous No.10754932]

>>10752744
Are they assemble it on a fucking parking lot now?
If this meme ship ever flies I'm gonna have a boner for days

[Anonymous No.10754994]

>>10754856
Hopefully cheaper launchers would allow for cheaper and more frequent probes and other science missions. I know that such things can't be made super cheap due to the need of good scientific equipment (which is rarely cheap), but it'll make such missions seem less risky.

It's kinda like how the Mars Climate Orbiter was going to be. Cheap and frequent missions to drive the costs down. Why was that abandoned though? IIRC, there was the only one probe before the concept was abandoned.

[Anonymous No.10755097]

>>10754994
Scientific instruments are only the part of the cost. The probe needs to actually make it to the site and work there for years, which doesn't come cheap, especially for landers. Also, the specialty; most missions are more or less unique since the scientific results from repeated missions are diminishing rapidly. There's no point in making the same spacecraft twice, and even "almost the same" missions actually differ a lot and are deeply customized, like Mars-2020 vs MSL, or different soviet Venus landers, or Japanese observatories and their black magic cooling systems with liquid He in neon ice tanks.

[Anonymous No.10755100]

>>10754994
>Cheap and frequent missions to drive the costs down
Only if you are mass producing a single spacecraft model, which doesn't make sense for the science output

[Anonymous No.10755104]

>>10754856
Sounds more like under-engineering then.

[Anonymous No.10755166]

>>10755100
>>10755097
A mass-produced probe bus designed to be able to deliver customized science payload to whatever destination would absolutely be worth the effort. As it stands we currently pretty much reinvent the wheel every single time we need a new probe for a new mission.

[Anonymous No.10755186]

>>10755100
Also if you just produce a bunch of identical clones of a single probe design, with identical science equipment, you can just spread them out across a planet and vastly multiply your useful data haul for a much reduced probe unit cost. If you can launch those probes all at once on a single large vehicle (Falcon Heavy for example) or in groups on a very cheap vehicle then you are far better off.