/sfg/ Spaceflight General

[Anonymous No.10936200]

pray for the cape edition
last >>10930007

[Anonymous No.10936237]

Your station module had better be a giant btc mining rig if you have to pay millions of dollars a day to NASA.

[Anonymous No.10936246]

>>10936200
O LAWD HE COMIN'

[Anonymous No.10936252]

how recent is the LUVOIR starship data? It still says 150t to LEO instead of 100

[Anonymous No.10936256]

>>10936237
Why not just bypass the ISS and start a purely commercial space station that'll be cheaper to rent than the ISS? or is that too independent from the government and they would have to demand that the station owners pay $13m a month for "insurance"?

[Anonymous No.10936261]

>>10936256
Its probably too expensive to run your own station right now. With the ISS you get access to a ton of stuff which makes it cheaper and easier for you.

[Anonymous No.10936262]

>>10936200

[Anonymous No.10936302]

>>10936256
$13m a month??! $13m a day! That's the only fair price to protect our American citizens' interests.

[Anonymous No.10936308]

>>10936252
100t Starship is minimum conservative payload. But Elon's aiming for 150+t.

[Anonymous No.10936314]

>>10936302
>"That's the American spirit! Private companies are inherently unstable and thus need to be reined in. Sure, they offer launches at such a low price that they might as well be stealing launches from TRUSTED and AMERICAN launch providers that are supported by the US government. But at what cost? Faster launch rates that will burn out anyone and make space boring. The possibility that someone would be in a spacecraft around the moon or beyond that hasn't been checked by 1,776 individual safety quality checks that takes years and billions of dollars to finish. Making space accessible to people who could IRREPARABLY DAMAGE the pristine conditions on other worlds. Trust me, America, when I say that the SLS (god bless it) is the best way America can get to space, then I meant it! I ask just a mere decade more time and $30B more to ensure that the way to space is a truly AMERICAN."

[Anonymous No.10936448]

>SpaceX announced that it has successfully completed a routine static fire acceptance test of the Falcon 9 booster that will eventually support Crew Dragon’s inaugural astronaut launch, expected no earlier than early 2020.
>Both NASA and SpaceX spokespersons were quite blunt about their opinions that it was possible – albeit highly unlikely – that Crew Dragon would be able to perform its first crewed launch before the end of 2019
>Starliner’s crewed flight debut is now unlikely to occur until Q1 2020 also
This leapfrog race is pretty intense..

[Anonymous No.10936524]

>>10936448
Starship will land people on Mars before Dragon 2 sends people to the ISS.

[Anonymous No.10936544]

>>10936524
That'd be amusing.

[Anonymous No.10936575]

>>10936261
Actually not for BFR class vessel. If we used that, it'd both be amazing, relatively cheap and it'd build very mant starships

[Anonymous No.10936870]

[Anonymous No.10936887]

We know that the southern pole is the most valuable location on the Moon, but what is the most valuable for Mars? Is it really Arcadia Planitia? If China were to launch a Mars base would they also pick the same places as SpaceX?

[Anonymous No.10936890]

>>10936887
The core.

[Anonymous No.10936896]

Actually China is a bad example since they would just copy SpaceX's Mars plans. Where would NASA want to land then if SpaceX never existed?

[Anonymous No.10936902]

>>10936896
Probably the same place

[Anonymous No.10936910]

SeaX: launch 18m rockets from the sea, no fixed facilities to get BTFO by hurricanes, launch your own space stations, recover your own rockets by barge, get massive shipyards in Korea or Turkey to churn out WATER TANKS in bulk.

Fuck it, Elon should go full Bond-villain and live in a huge oil tanker with pet octopus.

[Anonymous No.10936922]

>>10936887
China will just copy as always, they wouldn't know where to start without the outlay of the West, as always. They don't have their own MRO to begin with.

[Anonymous No.10936939]

>>10936887
Not necessarily the most valuable, just a good contender for a first base. There are certainly better spots than the ones they have picked but without a really comprehensive resource survey of the whole planet it's just an informed guess.

[Anonymous No.10936953]

https://www.science20.com/hank_campbell/james_webb_space_telescope_14_years_behind_schedule_gets_mechanical_assembly-241299

>JWST will never fly
>SLS will never fly
>Orion will never fly
>Defund NASA and let SpaceX do the literal heavy lifting.

[Anonymous No.10936961]

>>10936953
Literally could not care less about JWST at this point, it's almost as bad as SLS

[Anonymous No.10936973]

>>10936870
Have you ever seen a car drive into water?

[Anonymous No.10936986]

>>10936973
Good thing it's going to be pressurised then right?

[Anonymous No.10937013]

Does anyone actually think NASA can land a man and woman on the moon by 2024 like they want? I can't quite put my finger on it but they seem much more risk averse and the organisation, motivation and abilities of the engineers and astronauts don't seem to be there for it to happen.

[Anonymous No.10937019]

>>10937013
honestly i still believe NASA has olympia-tier engineers capable of incredible work, but they are held back by bureaucracy, risk-aversion etc. SpaceX is doing amazing work, now think of what they would be doing if they had access to the brainpower of NASA's top men.

[Anonymous No.10937059]

>>10936953
>JWST
Supposed to be $500 million in cost. Now its $12 billion USD. Started in 1996, was supposed to fly as "faster, better, and cheap"

>SLS/Orion
"Started" in 2011, the plan was to refurbish some old tech and would cost "$18" billion for the whole program. Its now mid 2019 and the cost is expected to rise into $40-$50 billion USD by the time it launched its first payload.

>Defund NASA
No, FUND NASA. But give them flexibility, change the old leadership of "slow and slower" to "fast and innovative." NASA needs more talents, they don't need to bleed talents.

[Anonymous No.10937068]

>>10937059
free nasa from the (((congress)))

[Anonymous No.10937070]

>>10937019
>now think of what they would be doing if they had access to the brainpower of NASA's top men
NASA is bleeding all the best talents to SpaceX(and prob blue origin). I don't remember the exact number, but their talent pool, the number of engineers who apply for SpaceX is HUGE. Some space news journalist revealed the number, but can't find the source yet. What NASA has is a trove of old knowledge tomes and some neat machines that can do neat calculations. SpaceX regularly works with NASA as a result to fill their knowledge gap.

[Anonymous No.10937071]

>>10937059
Will JWST be the most expensive thing to be launched into space on a single rocket?

[Anonymous No.10937078]

>>10937070
encouraging to hear, let those brains be free

[Anonymous No.10937082]

What's up with all these retard tier mars rover designs, I mean just look at this piece of shit.

Pretty sure a practical easy to build rover is basically going to be a big dome attached to 6-8 separately powered and articulated wheel legs with Xbox huge wheels, not these tiny joke wheels.

[Anonymous No.10937084]

>>10937070
500.000 people applied to SpaceX last year

[Anonymous No.10937096]

>>10937084
Yeah, its something like that. There's about 1.6M active engineers in the US. So 1/3 of the US engineer talent pool is looking to work at SpaceX.

[Anonymous No.10937099]

>>10937082
Yeah it's dumb, when you consider the kind of terrain these rovers are going to have to tackle the main body needs to be at least two metres off the ground, maybe more with massive fucking wheels and definitely not rubber lmao. Steel wheels are going to be standard on Mars I would guess. A sphere would be the best shape for containing atmosphere and minimising weight but yeah it's probably easier to do a half sphere from a building and design point of view. If they are battery powered which seems nearly 100% they also want some capacity to have built in solar, whether that's the exterior of the dome covered in panels or some kind of tubes that can roll out solar film.

[Anonymous No.10937118]

>>10937071
Holy shit you are right. Cant imagine the pressure on Arianespace. For that money you can launch a small swarm of smaller telescopes. Man I hate corruption and bureaucracy...

[Anonymous No.10937126]

>>10937118
Can’t wait for the salt when they turn it on it doesn’t work.
>The cooling system was is working sub-optimally. The whole thing is useless now. Lel.

[Anonymous No.10937134]

>>10936200
Latest.

[Anonymous No.10937340]

>>10936973
Just bring a Lotus

[Anonymous No.10937366]

>>10937084
And how many get the job?

[Anonymous No.10937388]

>>10937118
For that money, you could literally build an entire rocket, complete with corruption.

[Anonymous No.10937442]

>>10937059
>Supposed to be $500 million in cost. Now its $12 billion USD
That's our money and I want it NOW

[Anonymous No.10937463]

>>10937388
Lol

[Anonymous No.10937478]

So Starlink will be an internet provider i can have that will directly help Spacex financially?

[Anonymous No.10937479]

>>10936870
HOW MANY TIMES DO WE NEED TO TEACH YOU THIS LESSON, OLD MAN

[Anonymous No.10937485]

>>10937059
Bridenstine is on the right track with the Artemis commercial contracts, but the red tape tying NASA to SLS and the Gateway screws the whole thing over. ULA and NG could make decent heavy lifters with less overrun than SLS if the launch component was done on a similar contract basis.

[Anonymous No.10937634]

>>10937126
If anything, it'll probably be used as an excuse to go even slower with all the other flagship projects. Europa clipper will probably have to wait until the next alignment before going. NASAs cocecuative successful launch requirement for an alternative heavy launcher to the SLS would increase from 10 to idk 20. Everything else would need more reviews and studies. All while NASA is left behind by even India, too bloated to adapt.

[Anonymous No.10937665]

>>10936986
How do you expect that pressurized vessel to go under water, especially in low gravity?

[Anonymous No.10937696]

what’s in the box

[Anonymous No.10937715]

>>10937696
The secret to getting SLS (god bless it) to launch on time.

[Anonymous No.10937721]

>>10937696
>Elon had the upper hand! I repeat, Elon has the upper hand!

[Anonymous No.10937757]

>>10937696
3 engines

[Anonymous No.10937759]

>>10937696
Raptors?

[Anonymous No.10937784]

>>10937082
This is falling into the same trap Apollo deniers fall into -- It does not look like I expected, so it must be impossible, fake or badly designed.

> 6-8 separately powered and articulated wheel legs

That much, at least, matches the picture.

[Anonymous No.10937799]

Will ESA be the unforseen roadblock
for SpaceX's Starlink? It'll be easy for them to blow this out of proportion and get Starlink delayed.

[Anonymous No.10937804]

>>10937799
Already approved by all the relevant American authorities, ESA can cry all they want.

[Anonymous No.10937811]

>>10937759
>>10937757
Impossible. For one it’s not the black raptor semi. And, Elon has only just said that SN 10 is done

[Anonymous No.10937813]

>>10937799
Shoot down the offending ESA sats

[Anonymous No.10937820]

>>10937696
flappy wingy bits

[Anonymous No.10937830]

>>10937799
This fucking salt over a routine operation.

[Anonymous No.10937835]

>>10937820
My money is on this.

[Anonymous No.10937837]

>>10937696
dragon dildoes

[Anonymous No.10937853]

>>10937799
>driving satellites manual
EUROPEANS!!!!

[Anonymous No.10937861]

>>10937830
The entire tweet chain they made was pure salt

[Anonymous No.10937869]

>muh evil megaconstellations

[Anonymous No.10937872]

>>10937082
a good rover would look like a Tesla pickup truck

[Anonymous No.10937873]

>>10937853
Kek

[Anonymous No.10937916]

>>10937853
They can't get more diesel fuel up to orbit to drive them, and it costs 5x what it would in freedomistan anyhow.

[Anonymous No.10937927]

>>10937082
It's like the gay ass electric car concepts before they started making them look like normal cars. It's meant to look embarrassing and push people away I guess.

[Anonymous No.10937930]

>>10937071
JWST+SLS NET 2031 when?

[Anonymous No.10937991]

>>10937634
>Europa clipper will probably have to wait until the next alignment before going
Luckily for us that'd only be about a year's delay, plus about a month, since the bigger the difference in orbital period between two planets the closer the sinode period approaches the orbital period of the innermost planet. That's true of direct transfers anyway, adding gravity assists complicates things.

[Anonymous No.10938018]

https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/1168582141128650753

Matt “The Boss” Desch joins the fight...

[Anonymous No.10938019]

>>10937799
i presume both satellites need to be deorbited

[Anonymous No.10938023]

Went to the Apollo 11 exhibit at tjr Museum of Flight yesterday. It was really great. Here's a few quick pictures that i took.

[Anonymous No.10938033]

>>10938023
God dammit.

[Anonymous No.10938040]

Went to the Apollo 11 Exhibit at the Museum of Flight yesterday. It was really great. I only took a few pictures, but I'll post them here.

[Anonymous No.10938043]

>>10938018
fucking savage

>>10938023
>>10938033
congratz anon we here in europoor dont have that cool exhibits to visit

[Anonymous No.10938048]

>>10938040

[Anonymous No.10938054]

>>10938043
Yeah, I am lucky enough to be from Seattle. I hate the degenerate bullshit that this area produces, but you really can't pick a better spot do be from if you're into
This rocket nozzle is probably the most impressive thing I have ever seen in person. Even more so than some of the ridiculously complex engines that are on display there.

[Anonymous No.10938057]

>>10938054
*into aviation
I didn't take this picture (obviously), but Bezos' recovered Apollo 11 bits were sitting behind the nozzle.

[Anonymous No.10938069]

>>10938057
My phone didn't save the picture I took without my goober of a friend and myself standing in front of the capsule, but here's that too.
The best part of the whole trip was the interest in spaceflight that it stirred up for my woman. She had a lot of questions, and said that the exhibit made her want to learn even more about the Apollo missions. I told her that I would dig up a youtube video that would break down the landings into layman's terms. Who should I look at for that? Scott Manley? Everyday Basedstronaut?

[Anonymous No.10938110]

>>10938069
>Who should I look at for that?
A better idea is for some anon to recommend a normal big budget documentary on youtube

[Anonymous No.10938121]

>>10938069
you look like you're from Seattle you degenerate commie fuck

[Anonymous No.10938153]

>>10938121
Lol you can't even see what I look like.
I have a crew cut, am physically fit and have no tattoos. I'm not really sure what you mean. Fuck the commies around me, though. It's really fucking out of hand out here. Lots of brown people screaming about injustice and junkies.

[Anonymous No.10938156]

>>10938153
you're fat, ugly, and have a neckbeard

[Anonymous No.10938168]

>>10938153
>Lol you can't even see what I look like.

[Anonymous No.10938174]

Wow ESA is embarassing themselves in front of the whole space community. I haven't seen a space official say something that bad since Rozogin's trampoline joke.

[Anonymous No.10938176]

>>10938153
Don't reply to it.

[Anonymous No.10938179]

>>10938176
the guy's /soc/ posting with his face, there's no reason not to make fun of him

[Anonymous No.10938180]

Rogozin*

[Anonymous No.10938191]

>>10938174
that was pretty funny though
ESA is just being cringe

[Anonymous No.10938212]

>>10938174
Matt Deutsch's tweet was a pretty good meme

[Anonymous No.10938227]

hmmmm

[Anonymous No.10938233]

>>10938227
When is the presentation for SpaceX? we need more starship pornography

[Anonymous No.10938237]

>>10938233
right now I'm indulging in some telescope porn and some SLS bashing in an official report porn (that's the best)

[Anonymous No.10938248]

>>10938237
look at the way it stretches, send pics plss

[Anonymous No.10938250]

>>10938233
Anniversary of first Falcon flight

[Anonymous No.10938253]

>>10938227
>>10938237
I’m sorry to break it to you fellas but Luvoir is vapourware, with an estimated cost of $16 billion without cost overruns. The White House has already tried to kill WFIRST because they have fiscal PTSD from JWST’s cost overruns, so an even bigger version of the same boondoggle is DOA.

[Anonymous No.10938262]

>>10937082
Why not just make an electric jeep?
Mars is just a normal desert, what's the issue?

[Anonymous No.10938263]

>>10938248
it's basically "hey, JWST developed some cool technology, what if we dumbed it down a little and then cranked up the instruments in the visual range to replace hubble"
they should make a less risky proposal that doesn't try to crank it up so hard and just dumbs down JWST technology to make a better hubble
and make sure it's serviceable by any one of the new crew capsules that's coming out
and has upgrade slots for that coronagraph that they want to spend 16 bajillion dollars developing

[Anonymous No.10938265]

>>10938250
Thanks!
but god damn, I still remember the the ITS presentation, I can't believe we are about to witness gen 3 mars vehicle

[Anonymous No.10938276]

>>10938262
NO! Space has to use handcrafted specialized tools and materials all made across the country. Using COTS materials is just not proper!!!!1

[Anonymous No.10938281]

>>10938262
Temperature and dust.

[Anonymous No.10938282]

>>10938262
> No oxygen: no fossile fuel engine
> Very cold: no rubber wheels, no standard Tesla batteries
> No thick atmosphere: car cabin is a big and heavy pressure vessel with hatch
> No streets: needs to be suitable for rough terrain

I don't know why it needs 6 wheels though, probably because of the last two points. But in the flat Arcadia Region, won't 4 wheels be enough?

[Anonymous No.10938286]

>>10938282
electric, open top jeep with climate controlled batteries and tethered suit plugs for life support
suits have an hour backpack or something so you can tie your winch to a big rock or an anchor

[Anonymous No.10938292]

>ohyeahitsallcomingtogether.jpg

[Anonymous No.10938294]

>>10938286
That's a 99% custom car you are talking about

[Anonymous No.10938300]

>>10938294
yes, it would not be CotS, but it's versatile enough you're making a few hundred
of course you'd also need metal mesh wheels
Tesla has the climate controlled batteries and other internals CotS right now, although it might need to be beefed up further

[Anonymous No.10938301]

>We have always had automatic systems on board but always have humans involved in decisions and timing. Automatic systems aren't good enough because data isn't good enough, shared fast enough, and other factors.
https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/1168599252706168833

>data isn't good enough, shared fast enough, and other factors
This is a big topic in the national security space community. It's why the Commerce Department is getting control over space situational awareness (SSA) data instead of the Air Force, and why the Air Force is pushing lots of other countries into building their own SSA capabilities and then sharing that data in a mutual exchange with the Air Force. Examples of countries include Brazil and South Korea.

[Anonymous No.10938307]

>>10938191
>pic

Kek. Had seen it before but didn't think it was real

[Anonymous No.10938308]

>>10938300
Also
> $10,000/kg to Mars surface minimum. You can and should spend much more on the car to make it lightweight, do as much or even more as Formula 1 teams do with their racing cars.

[Anonymous No.10938310]

>>10938308
That number is too high, if the number is that high we aren't going to Mars at all ever
where is that number from?

[Anonymous No.10938312]

>>10938308
Majority of F1 car budget goes to engine and aerodynamics, not to weight reduction

[Anonymous No.10938326]

>>10938282
>no rubber wheels
Does material science really have nothing on this one? No special mixture, no substitute, nothing that's better than metal on stone?

[Anonymous No.10938338]

>>10938326
wire mesh wheels are good enough for earth, but nobody uses them because aerospace memes fucking the price on them
anyway they already exist and work fine

[Anonymous No.10938343]

>>10938338
>nobody uses them because aerospace memes fucking the price on them
But how else can you send welfare to defense contractors?

[Anonymous No.10938350]

>>10938310
$/kg to Mars surface is much higher than to LEO.
To bring something to LEO, you fuel Starship and Super Heavy with methalox at super cheap Earth prices and launch them once, occupying them for a day.
To bring something to Mars you have ~8 launches of SS/SH just to have a SS fully fueled in LEO, then SS goes to Mars, is fueled with methalox at super expensive Mars prices, goes back. SH is launched 8 times and used for 8 days. There are 9 SS launches and one SS was away for at best a year and more likely almost 4 years (9+26+9 months), meaning much higher SS depreciation cost. If they achieved $1,000/kg to Mars surface that means they would have achieved $50/kg to LEO.

Even if its $1,000/kg that still means you can spend $80,000 to save 100 kg and its a profit. That means more titanium and carbon and less cheaper steel variants found in a COTS car.

[Anonymous No.10938357]

>>10938326
Rubber is not a good choice in freezing temperatures and almost vacuum pressure

[Anonymous No.10938363]

>>10938292
>tfw you can make a rocket at home because of street racer culture

[Anonymous No.10938364]

>>10938350
you're factoring in a bunch of prices that aren't real, you can't use the entire GDP of the colony for your $/kg calculation
steel has benefits over carbon because you can repair frame damage in the field with nothing but a ghetto welder (a car battery and an appropriately sized wire) which is even easier than on earth due to the CO2 atmosphere on Mars
I want to see the research papers that come out of basic welding research by boots on Mars
>>10938357
pic related flew on Apollo 14

[Anonymous No.10938368]

>>10938364
>pic related flew on Apollo 14
And how long did that get used, like two days?

[Anonymous No.10938370]

>>10938364
>pic related flew on Apollo 14
What is that, I've never seen it?

[Anonymous No.10938376]

>>10938370
>>10938368
no fucking clue
https://www.nasa.gov/specials/wheels/
found this while I was looking for the metal wheels that NASA is so proud of lately

[Anonymous No.10938377]

>>10938364
>aerospace grade wheelbarrow
Now we're talking.

[Anonymous No.10938383]

>tfw Mars will be routine and boring in 20 years

[Anonymous No.10938386]

fucking found it
now THIS is what I'm talking about

[Anonymous No.10938389]

>>10938363
Its amazing how many parts can be used for rocket engines (or at least appear to be). So hopefully whatever I finally make will do multi orbit drifting.

Otherwise keep an eye out on the news.

[Anonymous No.10938394]

>>10938383
That better be a standard space-fairer outfit for Martian women of the future.

[Anonymous No.10938400]

>>10938364
>>10938376
Did that thing actually go to the Moon? There is a green bush on the right. The space in lunar lander for lunar rover was very limited in and I don't remember ever seeing or reading about a towed cart.

[Anonymous No.10938404]

>>10938400
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Shepard_Next_to_Modular_Equipment_Transporter_-_GPN-2000-001147.jpg

[Anonymous No.10938406]

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

[Anonymous No.10938412]

>>10938404
>>10938406
Thanks! I learned something new today

[Anonymous No.10938417]

>>10938412
me too! all sorts of weird shit happened during Apollo

[Anonymous No.10938431]

>>10938364
> pic related flew on Apollo 14
You are just stupid, they often test those vehicles with rubber wheels on Earth because the steel wheels are made for lower Gs.

>you're factoring in a bunch of prices that aren't real
You are just stupid. 8 SS/SH launches to get one SS fully fueled in LEO already means a factor of 8 compared to a single LEO launch. If you need to spend $1 Bn for all infrastructure for in situ refueling (cheap) and that infrastructure then refuels 15 Starships, that's $67 M for one methalox refuel. If one SS costs $300 M and can do 5 Mars trips at 4 years each (vs. 100 LEO launches when it remains on earth), that's $60 M in depreciation per Mars trip vs. $3 M per LEO trip. All in all factor 20 is more than reasonable. Talking about the 2020s here, the time when they need/want their first cars.

[Anonymous No.10938433]

>>10938431
rubber wheels on the moon, bruh
read the articles

[Anonymous No.10938443]

>>10938394
All people wear skinsuits like asuka in the future

[Anonymous No.10938444]

Looks like ESA warned SpaceX ahead of time that a conjunction was possible but SpaceX basically replied with "fuck off".

[Anonymous No.10938449]

>>10938444
>SpaceX basically replied with "fuck off".
Source on that? Sounds hilarious.

[Anonymous No.10938452]

>>10938449
>However, spaceflight journalist Jonathan O’Callaghan was told by sources in ESA that the space agency had directly contacted SpaceX with concerns about a possible Starlink-Aeolus collision and the company refused to move their spacecraft in cooperation.
https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-refuses-starlink-satellite-move-odd-space-agency-tweets/

>SpaceX sent a short email to ESA saying they would not move their satellite.
>ESA have been pretty frustrated with SpaceX so far. There has been very little communication regarding Starlink, despite repeated attempts by ESA to contact them
>As to why Aeolus had to move and not Starlink, my source just said "in space there are no rules". Basically, SpaceX said they wouldn't move. So Aeolus had to move.
https://twitter.com/Astro_Jonny/status/1168592399729397767

[Anonymous No.10938458]

>>10938452
Who requested the patch first?
That should be the most simple solution to this.

[Anonymous No.10938459]

the ESA satellite. it maps wind to fill in weather data gaps.

[Anonymous No.10938464]

>>10938458
No idea

[Anonymous No.10938474]

>>10938443
If you want to optimize where blood pools in the body even the face I imagine, you'd probably have to wear those, but with gravity therapy every now and then it couldn't be too bad. It might even be fine with an extra dose of near sightedness

[Anonymous No.10938479]

>>10938452
ESA playing politics. Neat.

[Anonymous No.10938489]

>>10938452
>ESA: Move your satellite SpaceX
>SpaceX: "No"
>ESA: Fine, asshole I'll move
>"ESA is forced to move from the collision with SpaceX's dangerous satellite"
Dirty politics

[Anonymous No.10938493]

>>10938489
Nah the real dirty fucking kikes are the journalists
>ESA moves satellite because of a 1/1000 chance of collision
>CNET: ESA satellite ALMOST HITS SpaceX satellite! Dangerous near miss!

[Anonymous No.10938502]

It says that Starlink has automatic collision avoidance but this was deliberately overridden by SpaceX.

[Anonymous No.10938504]

>>10938493
No, read the actual ESA post. Journalists don't have to when ESA is manufacturing some fear mongering post.

>For the first time ever, ESA has performed a 'collision avoidance manoeuvre' to protect one of its satellites from colliding with a 'mega constellation'
>to protect one of its satellites from colliding with a mega constellation

>https://twitter.com/esaoperations/status/1168533241873260544

And then there's a host of posts that try to warn about collisions and how they're trying to say its a "very rare" event and they're now forced to do so by SpaceX. Ofcourse Iridium boss countered that bullshit by saying they do it regularly.

[Anonymous No.10938511]

If it was a Chinese satellite they would've let it collide with Starlink then sent up a bunch of ball bearings in Starlink's orbit as a response.

[Anonymous No.10938517]

>>10938511
Has that ever happened before? Or what are you basing that off of?

[Anonymous No.10938526]

>>10938502
Based

[Anonymous No.10938528]

I keep telling you guys that law enforcement is going to be the source for the next big push into space. Disputes like the one between SpaceX and ESA are going to be more frequent as time goes on because there really isn't any way to enforce laws in space.

>>10938452
>in space there are no rules
Not everyone is going to be on board with that idea, and will have to deploy measures in space to protect their assets.

[Anonymous No.10938529]

>>10938528
Can't wait for the space force to be deployed to protect Israeli assets in space.

[Anonymous No.10938531]

>>10938528
This one looks more manufactured to me, so we'll have to see what SpaceX thought of ESA's communication with them.

[Anonymous No.10938535]

>Space has no rules
Just apply basic fucking road rules and it's fine stop complicating things
>yield to the right (add "or bottom" for space)
there I fixed it

[Anonymous No.10938538]

>>10938528
Next time ESA will use their harpoons to jab a passing Starlink sat.

[Anonymous No.10938541]

>>10938535
>whoever's moving faster has right of way

[Anonymous No.10938543]

>https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1168573834657710081
>Yes. Based on @cgbassa's analysis this is 2019-029AV, satellite 44. This satellite is being used to test satellite controllability at low altitudes. It makes occasional orbit adjustments and is definitely active.

So the SpaceX satellite was a test satellite designed to test maneuverability at low altitude.

Still uncertain as to what happened with the communication between the two. We know the Eurocucks were butthurt as a result of the communications.

[Anonymous No.10938544]

>>10938535
Not all satellites can maneuver and orbit data may be inaccurate. Some of the smaller sats are also currently impossible or very difficult to detect.

[Anonymous No.10938546]

>>10938543
it's the "troll ESA by maneuvering into collisions with their satellites" satellite

[Anonymous No.10938547]

>>10938543
>Designed to test maneuverability
>Move sat pls
>Lol get fucked cunt

[Anonymous No.10938552]

>>10938543
all depends on who had first dips on that orbit.
SpaceX telling esa to fuck off would mean they where there first, otherwise what the fuck is spaceX even doing trying to piss of a potential client?

[Anonymous No.10938553]

please do not post links to spaceflight general in kerbal shitposting general

[Anonymous No.10938555]

Why is SpaceX such a bully and all the American commenters (not only 4chan) too?

[Anonymous No.10938557]

>>10938544
Well, just like on the road, if someone's clearly out of control you yield to them for your own safety. The right of way is not an airbag.

[Anonymous No.10938560]

>>10938553
Is it against the rules?

[Anonymous No.10938563]

>>10938543
I suspect SpaceX uses a different standard of risk (say, 1/100 or 1/500) and didn't want to play with the ESA's 1/1000th risk mitigation.

[Anonymous No.10938567]

>>10938560
it's in extremely poor judgement, if you know anything about the quality of the posters on /vg/
see how many frogposters just showed up?
fuck off, frogposters

[Anonymous No.10938568]

>>10938555
Space belongs to the United States, fuck off the rest of you.

[Anonymous No.10938570]

>>10938552
>ESA
>prospective client
>for anyone but Ariane
good fucking luck with that

>>10938555
because it's time to finally start exploiting space properly and the ESA is pissy about muh orbits

[Anonymous No.10938572]

>>10938555
Because of a false sense of superiority over their massive military which is in fact just Israel's tool. The American public doesn't get a say in how it's used, just an attack dog for Bibi.

>>10938568
>Space belongs to Israel

Ftfy

[Anonymous No.10938574]

>>10938567
I'll refrain then, however

>see how many frogposters just showed up?
Two have shown up recently. One before I made the link, and one after. I'm not taking the blame for someone posting a cartoon autistic amphibian.

[Anonymous No.10938575]

>>10938552
>SpaceX telling esa to fuck off
We don't know what happened other than ESA's clearly hurt posts. But ESA themselves said they've done 28 maneuvers just this year already. That's a weekly maneuver. So ESA saying "for the first time ever, we were forced to move" is bit hyperbolic.

>>10938563
Either that, or communication didn't go through proper channels.

[Anonymous No.10938577]

Right, I'll be back when the shitposters get tired.

[Anonymous No.10938578]

>>10938567
Stay mad jannie, I'm not even from that autistic dumpster fire.

[Anonymous No.10938582]

>>10938570
>>ESA
>>prospective client
>>for anyone but Ariane
Idk about that, ESA seems to love the Soyuz.

[Anonymous No.10938585]

>>10938552
ESA doesn't do business with SpaceX. They are mandated to use only European assets and only deal with the American assets when its through NASA.

[Anonymous No.10938593]

[Anonymous No.10938599]

>>10938593
What's ESA going to do about it? I'm pretty sure all they can do is complain to the US government and hope that it does something to SpaceX.

[Anonymous No.10938602]

>>10938574
you should feel bad for attracting frogposters

[Anonymous No.10938609]

On the bright side megaconstellations hogging the spacelanes means that spacecraft will run low on fuel trying to dodge them, therefore increasing the desire for fuel depots.

[Anonymous No.10938613]

>>10938609
>d-word
Reported. Those things are literally communism.

[Anonymous No.10938621]

>>10938599
Several parties in the US goverment are looking for ways to seriously limit spaceX.
Having more backers like ESA behind them could be just the thing they need.

[Anonymous No.10938622]

I hope pic related completely destroys Cape Canaveral and the whole SpaceX facility in Cocoa.

t. European

[Anonymous No.10938626]

>>10938622
Go drive your manual satellites.

[Anonymous No.10938627]

>megaconstellations force satellites into needing refueling
>Starship will have cheap spacecraft refueling capabilities
Elon is playing some 4D chess

[Anonymous No.10938632]

>>10938622
I hope that both ESA and SpaceX can reach an agreement to further advance humans into space.
t. European

[Anonymous No.10938641]

>>10937830
>>10937861
Fucking French, honestly. I hate to introduce politics but it's the same story with Brexit. Pure surrender monkey butthurt

[Anonymous No.10938646]

>>10937096
Wow

[Anonymous No.10938660]

>>10938632
This. As funny as it was to have SpaceX essentially tell ESA to "fuck off", this sets a bad president for orbital rights as it establishes that there really isn't any rules regarding orbital rights. Sure there was China and India trashing orbits with anti-sat tests, but those were from countries that weren't from the "old guard" of space. SpaceX vs ESA is the first case of this, and if two agencies from parts of the world that pretty much agree with each other and cooperate, then it suggests that disputes in space are going to get much messier as more members join the "space club".

[Anonymous No.10938668]

>>10938622
Can't wait for decades of SpaceX and Space Force dabbing on all comers and dominating the new and better than ever Space Race.

t. Ulsterman.

[Anonymous No.10938698]

>>10938660
>if two agencies from parts of the world that pretty much agree with each other and cooperate
Does SpaceX and ESA even have a proper communication channel? SpaceX might have thought "[e-mail]" was a random guy who wanted spacex to move their satellite.

[Anonymous No.10938726]

>>10938350
>Mars prices
There's no such thing as a Mars price, the propellant they make on the surface is free.

[Anonymous No.10938731]

>>10938431
>If you need to spend $1 Bn for all infrastructure for in situ refueling (cheap) and that infrastructure then refuels 15 Starships
So make it refuel a million starships, problem solved and also your understanding of how pricing works is laughable.

[Anonymous No.10938732]

>>10938726
Not unless the USAF charges them for making propellant as an "insurance fee".

[Anonymous No.10938733]

>>10938726
Nothing is free. It costs money to make the propellant. The costs are translated into time invested in hardware, time invested in using the energy to convert into methane, cost of hardware, cost of maintenance, cost of delivery/setup of the hardware, cost of ease of accessibility, etc.

Even if a magic alien existed on Mars that magically refilled Starship's fuel in mars orbit, it would still cost Starship the launch cost, wear/tear of the rocket, maintenance and others.

[Anonymous No.10938736]

>>10938474
It's because it can keep you alive even under sudden depressurization of your habitat, and it also acts as the inner layer to future space-suits, duh

[Anonymous No.10938740]

>>10938660
So basically ESA just reminded everyone that they are butthurt losers compared to SpaceX, and with their girly salt gave us all another opportunity to laugh at them.

Which was nice.

Not sure how it helps the cause of space diplomacy though.

[Anonymous No.10938751]

>>10938733
>Nothing is free
If I chop down trees and buck them into firewood to heat my house for a winter, sure it takes time and effort, but it costs me no MONEY. Money is the only cost to worry about when it comes to figuring out Mars transport prices. Even Elon himself said that the return flight from Mars is totally free of charge.

[Anonymous No.10938754]

>>10938751
Your axe wears up, and will wventually have to be fixed or replaced

[Anonymous No.10938761]

>>10938754
After multiple decades, and I can do any repair job myself so long as the head isn't completely destroyed. The axe returns its value a hundred-thousand-fold. Try again.

[Anonymous No.10938762]

>>10938751
Time = money, unless you're a hobo. For example, for someone like Bill Gates, it cost more for him to pick up a $1000 bill that falls from his pocket every minute than to hire a person and pay them $10000 per month to pick up the money for him.

[Anonymous No.10938770]

>>10938762
Time doesn't equal money, it equals work, and on Earth work equals money, but on Mars it equals surviving. The closest thing to currency even involved with the people inside colonies on Mars will be contraband and black markets, people trading homebrew vodka for blowjobs etc.

[Anonymous No.10938771]

>>10938761
Instead of the hour or two spending everyday chopping wood and preparing for wood heating, you could work 1 hour a day and get your heating bill from an electric heater for a month.

[Anonymous No.10938773]

>>10938770
So you confirmed yourself to be a retard. Great.

[Anonymous No.10938779]

Are there university coalitions that are looking to possibly sending scientists to mars in the future to come.

[Anonymous No.10938788]

>>10938779
>Scientists

Lmao useless mouths to feed won't be going to Mars outside of a few tokens for a long time. Mars needs people who can build shit, not soft faggots who sit in their office all day and speculate about rocks.

[Anonymous No.10938789]

>>10938771
but it doesn't pay for the electric lines out to his cabin, and the cost of the heater

[Anonymous No.10938795]

>>10938789
You then work 4 hours and buy a solar panel to power your heater for life or use that same power to power your lights or charger your laptop.

Do people have no imagination?

[Anonymous No.10938799]

>>10938795
it builds character

[Anonymous No.10938800]

>>10938795
>Buy a solar panel
>To power a heater
>Implying solar panels don't have a useful lifespan
>Implying even a massive 10kw system will be able to run a retard high draw electric heater except maybe when the sun is full and blazing
>Can't heat your house at night

[Anonymous No.10938801]

>>10938795
Too bad there's no entity sitting around on Mars with loads of propellant for sale then, huh.

[Anonymous No.10938804]

>>10938800
based and cold climate pilled

[Anonymous No.10938806]

>>10938751
but there's no trees to chop down on mars

[Anonymous No.10938807]

>>10938801
not yet

[Anonymous No.10938815]

>>10938807
NOT IF I HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT THAT AND I DO

[Anonymous No.10938818]

>>10938806
In this analogy the trees are carbon dioxide and water ice, chopping is the work involved processing these into methane and oxygen, and heating the house is getting enough propellant to enable transport back to Earth.
>>10938807
And for there to be one, guess what, they're going to have to chop down their own trees and buck their own firewood

[Anonymous No.10938820]

Was it kino?

[Anonymous No.10938824]

>>10938820

[Anonymous No.10938826]

>>10938820

[Anonymous No.10938830]

>>10938818
no, heating the house is heating the house
you then put some of your firewood into your full flow staged combustion engine and send that back to Earth

[Anonymous No.10938833]

>>10938830
The colony on Mars will need barely any heating, for the most part they're going to be more worried about radiating away excess heat. The Martian atmosphere may be cold but it's also thin enough that the rate at which is pulls heat is extremely slow.

[Anonymous No.10938834]

>>10938800
>buy $100 solar panel with 100 watt
>30 years later: 85% rated power
>60 years later: 60% rated power
>100 years later: 30% rated power

Okay.

[Anonymous No.10938835]

>>10938788
fuck you get some geologists down there

[Anonymous No.10938840]

>>10938835
there will be three geologists on Mars and they will have had careers on Earth drilling for oil in northern Canada. Their jobs will be to prospect for large water deposits, ideally a liquid aquifer. There will be three of them because one guy can make stupid mistakes on his own and two guys can get into deadlock arguments.

[Anonymous No.10938858]

>>10938770
I will crash the mars economy by giving free blowjobs

[Anonymous No.10938875]

>>10938858
Please no. No one should get your herpes.

[Anonymous No.10938877]

>>10938552
I bet the first war in space will happen between corporate satellite systems vying for the most profitable orbits..

[Anonymous No.10938882]

>>10938875
Hey I am completely clean. Maybe you have space herpes...

[Anonymous No.10938885]

>>10938882
70% of adults in US have herpes.

[Anonymous No.10938902]

>>10936200
So at this point, if we end up getting to Mars in the 2020s with Starship and New Armstrong, and things keep accelerating from there, what are the odds of us seeing an IRL version of pic related before the end of the century?

[Anonymous No.10938910]

>>10938885
Too bad I'm not american :^)

[Anonymous No.10938914]

>>10938902
Man that ship is gorgeous

[Anonymous No.10938921]

>>10938910
90% of non Americans have herpes. Also 0% chance of non-Americans going to mars in your lifetime.

[Anonymous No.10938923]

>>10938914
Avatar's story may have been whatever, but man was it easily the most pornographic hard sci-fi film since 2001.

[Anonymous No.10938925]

>>10938902
>((they)) want to keep this from you

[Anonymous No.10938938]

>>10938923
Apart from the hand-waving that let superconductor-bearing hills float without the magnetic fields ripping organic matter to shreds, yeah. Lot of ideas and tech I love from that movie.

[Anonymous No.10938941]

Well, I got onto my uni’s hyperloop team. Yay?

[Anonymous No.10938950]

>>10938941
Now you have to compete again 100 other teams.

[Anonymous No.10938952]

>>10938941
Haven't you heard? Thunderf00t busted hyperloop.

[Anonymous No.10938966]

Thoughts on SpaceShipTwo?

[Anonymous No.10938973]

>>10938966
Suborbital tourism right? Its fine for what it does, I think, but not innovative enough in this day/age.

[Anonymous No.10938977]

>>10938966
It's a neat concept and is really cool, but I don't think it'll be successful unless the ticket price drops substantially from $250,000 per person. I doubt that suborbital tourism is ever going to catch on unless it gets much cheaper. Skydiving is a somewhat comparable tourist attraction and it's about $200 to $400 per person.

[Anonymous No.10938992]

>>10938966
>Thoughts on SpaceShipTwo?
Their window of relevance has very nearly passed.

[Anonymous No.10939001]

>>10938292
Please keep us in the loop. Looks pretty cool.

[Anonymous No.10939038]

>>10938950
There are 21 of us and we are building off of an okay design from last year. I think we have a shot.

[Anonymous No.10939058]

>>10938966
As much as I dislike Bezos Origin, I feel like the New Shepard is a better architecture for suborbital tourism, and if they get a steady cadence going, with multiple vehicles flying, they might get ticket prices in the sub-$30,000 range and really have a good business going until Spacex starts offering orbital circumnavigation of the globe trips in Starship for $10,000 a head.

[Anonymous No.10939072]

>>10938938
James Cameron just wanted to film his 4K 3D interactive Yes album covers like the virulent autist that he is, who am I to argue with that?

I just liked that the macguffin was a room temperature superconductor. Cameron basically managed to take a story with as much nerd cred as classic 60s hard sci-fi or your average Larry Niven novel and turn it into a >2 billion blockbuster. Everything in that movie had some autistic worldbuilding explanation behind it. Everything. All James.

[Anonymous No.10939075]

>>10939001
Thanks! I will. What I need to do next is figure out what size of fittings I need for valves, pressure regulators, pressure sensors, etc. The tube that comes off the nos tank is a -6AN so I'm going to try to find stuff for that. The hard part (apart from needing more money) is to have a test stand for this. Which I have no plans for right now, but I know it's going to be expensive.

[Anonymous No.10939082]

>>10939072
>All James.
Except for the fact that all of the creature designs were done my my man Wayne Barlowe.

[Anonymous No.10939114]

>>10939072
I can't wait to see how weird the next 4 get

[Anonymous No.10939119]

We can dream right?

[Anonymous No.10939121]

>>10939114
Considering that in the first Avatar there was a cut scene with pregnant blue lemurs... it's going to get really weird.

[Anonymous No.10939136]

>>10939121
I dunno where the plot is gonna go, but I do know that there are gonna be sets of perky blue alien tits barely covered by tribal necklaces bouncing around on screen for three and a half hours per movie, so I'll probably go see in theaters and buy the bluray ngl

[Anonymous No.10939148]

>>10939136
>"Dude. Stop clapping, the movie isn't even over yet."

[Anonymous No.10939153]

That guy that said on the podcast that SpaceX is charged $13m for reusable rockets is at the center of a contoversy in the Air Force. Apparently pro-Space Force advocates in the Air Force were silenced by higher ups. But General Kwast (the guy from the podcast) refused to be silent. Now it's been revealed that he is being forced to retire. The Air Force is admitting that there was an issue with Space Force proponents.
https://spacenews.com/air-force-changes-message-on-space-force-amid-criticism-it-stifled-debate/

>Leaders were caught off guard on Aug. 10 when a Kwast op-ed appeared in Politico arguing for a more aggressive space posture tied to deep space exploration and colonization.
>But it was no secret in Air Force circles that Kwast had drawn the ire of senior leaders over the past several months for “going rogue,” one source said.

[Anonymous No.10939166]

>>10939153
oof

[Anonymous No.10939173]

>>10939153
Remember that this doesn't confirm the $13M fee that SpaceX is getting. For all we know, the guy fibbed and the USAF fired him for spreading misinformation.

Either way, kinda sucked for him. He seemed like he honestly thought that he was spreading the truth that everyone needed to hear. Hopefully he doesn't get completely screwed over.

[Anonymous No.10939187]

>>10939153
>What Kwast is saying is good but it’s not practical. These are things that we will get to, but there are immediate things that we need to be able to do now so we’re not outpaced by Russia and China. We have to protect and harden satellites, we have to have space situational awareness so we can do the deep space, more visionary things.”
>Air Force leaders see naïveté in Kwast’s views, the officer said, because they ignore fiscal and political realities. “They’re only going to give us so much budget to do so much, so we have to make sure we’re doing what the military is expected to do be fore we go ‘Starfleet’ and try to do things that NASA is actually charged with doing.”
LMAO. OLD SPACE. Is Air Force seriously trying to use the "NASA does Deep Space exploration" excuse? NASA is crippled by the congress, it can't do anything but spend huge chunks of its money on black hole projects with huge cost over runs with no oversight. Their other excuse is we shouldn't push the boundaries is so fucking dumb. Budget will always be limited, there will never be an unlimited budget era unless an extremely apparent threat to the nation. In the meanwhile, they should have developed the Deep Space missions where NASA was slacking off. Instead of using the Space technology advantage, they're wasting time and resources and letting other nation states catch up. What's US going to do when China launches their own Space Corps? Getting caught pants down isn't the answer. Dumb fucking corrupt and old leaders need to think 20 years into the future, 20 years in the past.

[Anonymous No.10939217]

>>10939173
>For all we know, the guy fibbed and the USAF fired him for spreading misinformation.
True, but the article makes it out that he is being fired for not toeing the Air Force line that military space should be focused on Earth/Earth orbit. Instead Kwast feels like that line of thought is keeping space grounded and instead suggests that the military should follow NASA to the Moon and SpaceX to Mars.

>>10939187
>Instead of using the Space technology advantage, they're wasting time and resources and letting other nation states catch up. What's US going to do when China launches their own Space Corps?
China already has their own form of a Space Force, the PLASSF. It was created in 2015 and is one of the main reasons why there was a push for the US to have it's own Space Force. Either way, I listened to the podcast and that's the point that Kwast was making: that we need to be pressing our advantage in space because other countries could snatch it from us, especially China.

[Anonymous No.10939219]

Is the Gateway Foundation a con or is their legitimate funding behind them?

[Anonymous No.10939224]

>>10939217
>True, but the article makes it out that he is being fired for not toeing the Air Force line that military space should be focused on Earth/Earth orbit. Instead Kwast feels like that line of thought is keeping space grounded and instead suggests that the military should follow NASA to the Moon and SpaceX to Mars.
I agree with his points. I was arguing that we shouldn't outright believe him when he said that the USAF fines SpaceX 13 million for every landing of a Falcon 9 for no reason just because he was fired for saying it.

[Anonymous No.10939231]

>>10939217
>we need to be pressing our advantage in space because other countries could snatch it from us
Oh and other countries could dictate the rules of space if they get ahead of us, which might end up pretty bad for us. It's the same reason why India launched that ASAT test earlier this year. India highlights getting fucked over by not having nuclear weapons early on and thus getting grandfathered in (the US put sanctions on them for developing nukes in the 90's). With that in mind, the Indian ASAT test would let India help decide the future of the militarization of space instead of being at the mercy of other countries.

[Anonymous No.10939235]

>>10939219
It looks like a con based on that picture alone. Compare that to a real proposal for a space station (module) like the one proposed by a legit space company, Nanoracks, who has years of experience in working with space stations.

[Anonymous No.10939310]

>>10939231
they developed nukes in the 70's

[Anonymous No.10939326]

>>10939187
I almost wish for China to do a display of their space power. Something ballsy to get the US to actually treat space seriously again.

[Anonymous No.10939334]

>>10939136
I await the fresh resurgence of porn with each new movie

[Anonymous No.10939360]

>>10939310
You're right. The sanctions were for testing nukes.
>"They clearly create a dangerous new instability in their region and, as a result, in accordance with U.S. law, I have decided to impose economic sanctions against India," Clinton said. Sanctions are mandatory under U.S. law when an undeclared nuclear state explodes a nuclear device.
http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/9805/13/india.us/

>India also was concerned about a repeat of history with it being one of the ASAT “have-nots” if there was ever a future ban on direct-ascent ASAT testing, as India had not tested a nuclear weapon before the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and thus is not considered to be a nuclear weapon state, per treaty language.
https://spacenews.com/op-ed-indias-asat-test-is-wake-up-call-for-norms-of-behavior-in-space/

[Anonymous No.10939392]

>>10939235
It's not a space station, but a space port with .10 g through spin grav

[Anonymous No.10939401]

>>10939235
>bolting a can to the side of the ISS is "more realistic" than a proper megaproject
true but by that logic Starship will never fly because SLS is more realistic, and we know how well that prediction has fared

[Anonymous No.10939433]

>crewed launch
What is SpaceX getting at

[Anonymous No.10939459]

>>10939153
Is there any other source that confirms that SpaceX actually pays 13 million for landings?

[Anonymous No.10939463]

>>10938552
They don't need to be even close to the same orbit to collide anon...
They were probably just going to be in the same spot at the same time in their orbits, and they could be completely different orbits.

[Anonymous No.10939617]

>>10938966
>piloted by humans
>project already killed two people
Its a death trap and pointless.
Just fly New Shepard.

[Anonymous No.10939633]

>>10939617
I thought it only killed one, unless there was another incident. The pilot who fucked up died, the copilot survived. In any case, it was a bad design that let that knob be pulled at that time in the flight, and at least this revealed it before they had actual paying passengers.
Except now it's taken so long to actually start passenger flights that the whole sub-orbital plane thing is basically obsolete.

[Anonymous No.10939703]

>>10939219
Their Von Braun concept isn't so nuts, but it's not going to be viable until a few other technologies are demonstrated in space (like NASA's orbital additive manufacturing missions and at least one large-scale inflatable module like a BA-330).

[Anonymous No.10939836]

>>10939703
Yeah it look viable, the robotics needed to assemble it seems pretty doable. I do remain skeptical about pressurising square containers though.

[Anonymous No.10939867]

>>10937059
Boeing is literally holding SLS hostage at this point. They will not finish putting the completed sections together UNLESS WE GET MORE MONEIES!

[Anonymous No.10939874]

>>10937799
>>10937830
There’s definitely something fishy about this.

[Anonymous No.10939915]

>>10939633
During development some fuel blew up and killed an engineer.

[Anonymous No.10939917]

I can't be the only one who thinks sub orbital tourism is a meme right?

[Anonymous No.10939933]

>>10939917
Who cares it got the Private space sector started.

It'll get takers once the prices become reasonable but it'll be a long long time before an acceptable price of admission pays for the flight.

[Anonymous No.10939939]

>>10939153
Can I get a link to this podcast?

How do i best follow Space Force developments?

[Anonymous No.10939988]

>>10938966
By the time it becomes feasible, Starship will probably be already lofting a hundred people into space at once. GG.

[Anonymous No.10940210]

inside look

[Anonymous No.10940231]

>>10939114
>>10939136
I thought the sequels died
didn't they say they were doing those back in fucking 2012 when the first came out?

[Anonymous No.10940235]

>>10940231
They get delayed by a year every year

[Anonymous No.10940239]

>>10940235
>They get delayed by a year every year

[Anonymous No.10940279]

Iridium NEXT is poised to send Starlink into the troposphere

[Anonymous No.10940327]

>>10938921
80% of all percents on the internet are invented

[Anonymous No.10940330]

>>10939917
There's a skydiving industry. Grand canyon tourism industry. So why not sub-orbital tourism industry?

Ofcourse, I agree with you on the fact its not my cup of tea, but that doesn't mean its a meme. They have some 100 people signed up to experience the suborbital view.

[Anonymous No.10940331]

>>10940327
Actually the percentage is 69.420%

[Anonymous No.10940333]

>>10940330
>There's a skydiving industry. Grand canyon tourism industry. So why not sub-orbital tourism industry?
Because right now, skydiving and Grand canyon tours are priced so that a typical wage can afford. Suborbital hops are too expensive right now, and that's why it's a meme.

[Anonymous No.10940337]

>>10940333
Supply x Demand. Just because a new iPhone from apple may cost $1m and they produce 10 of them, doesn't mean no one will buy it. I can guarantee you, all 10 will be sold.

[Anonymous No.10940340]

>>10940337
because iToddlers are retards

[Anonymous No.10940352]

>>10940340
Change iPhone to Nike shoes. Or Toyota car or Popeyes sauce or Dell computer or a piece of rock or anything. Value is in the perception, the experience.

Its not just an Apple thing and its not just a human thing, its game theory.

[Anonymous No.10940354]

>>10940330
>>10940333
and a question is if the current suborb, which consists exactly of Virgin Galactic, can scale to a lower price once there's not a waiting list to be "first", and there are cooler ways to get suborbital (BO, SpaceX) which might also be more economical, and their window of opportunity is rapidly closing

tl;dr if VG can't do it cheaper than BO and SX, they're gone

[Anonymous No.10940362]

[Anonymous No.10940369]

>>10939939
>Can I get a link to this podcast?
https://www.thespaceshow.com/show/22-aug-2019/broadcast-3361-lt.-gen.-steven-kwast-usaf

> How do i best follow Space Force developments?
I don't know if there is a best way. Space News will usually do most people pretty well.

[Anonymous No.10940416]

>>10940369
Thanks.

[Anonymous No.10940426]

>>10940354
Nope

[Anonymous No.10940581]

https://twitter.com/lorengrush/status/1168917747109191681

Statement from SpaceX on the ESA/Starlink potential collision on Monday

[Anonymous No.10940604]

>>10940581
>communication error
That's what I expected. ESA took this as a snub, and acted unprofessionally.

[Anonymous No.10940636]

Looks like the hurricane has lost losing power, its now cat2 and will probably miss SpaceX. Good news for them.

[Anonymous No.10940648]

>>10940581
The EU are probably shitting themselves over a more efficient and uncontrollable competitor in the market so will use any reason to slander it, they always do. Expect more 'incidents' with the ESA in the future and some kind of tariff on starlink usage within the EU.

[Anonymous No.10940655]

>>10940648
>tariff on starlink usage within the EU.
they literally, phisically can't enforce it

[Anonymous No.10940656]

>>10940655
They can regulate the antennae required though, right?

[Anonymous No.10940660]

>>10940656
anyone with IQ>110 and 100 USD can make an antenna up to near microwave wavelength. It's a generic radio/microwave antenna anyways. I think Starlink uses the 24 GHz Ka band

[Anonymous No.10940663]

>>10940660
They can blind starlink satellites if necessary, but I doubt it would come to that. Russia/China will surely do that, if SpaceX failed to meet their law and try to operate it as a rogue company.

[Anonymous No.10940667]

>>10940663
China may test their anti-satellite missiles against SpaceX, but then the US, and specially the Air Force would probably retaliate

[Anonymous No.10940670]

>>10940660
I thought that there has to be some level of tracking on behalf of the antenna? Or at least a way for Starlink sats to track antennae?

>>10940663
Hong Kong would be interested in Starlink then.

[Anonymous No.10940673]

>>10940670
I think that there will be so many satellites (around 12000) that you will connect to one pointing at any spot in the sky

[Anonymous No.10940691]

Starship fin!

[Anonymous No.10940739]

>>10940673
Not if the EU could talk the US into regulating SpaceX much more. That $13M fee from the USAF would be pennies compared to the "Clean Night Skys Green Tax".

[Anonymous No.10940743]

>>10937799
Starlink is trash anyways, just contributing to litter orbit with cheap satellites.

[Anonymous No.10940793]

>>10940743
SEETHING

[Anonymous No.10940799]

>>10940743
>Starlink is trash anyways
The idea behind starlink is great, having above fiberglass grade internet anywhere you want on the planet is genius.
But adding thousands of satelites to a already "congested" sky is a big downside.

[Anonymous No.10940801]

>>10940743
>when you’re a space flight enthusiast but you’re also European.

[Anonymous No.10940815]

>>10940743
This. We must think of those poor Sentinelese who will now have their night sky forever tarnished by greedy American capitalism. Imagine how much their religion will change because of this. It could incur massive cultural changes which could doom up to 500 people! That's so inhumane! We must restrict American spaceflight so it'll be kept in check just like their white privilege should be.

[Anonymous No.10940828]

>>10940815
To be fair. They are ugly on the nightsky.

[Anonymous No.10940831]

>>10940815
You're starting to make me realize that the Taliban probably just blew up that ancient Buddah statue in Afghanistan just to make people who say things like that shut up.

[Anonymous No.10940836]

>>10940670
>>10940673
I think it's probably going to be some kind of phased array antenna, like a flat panel with a grid of maybe 16-64 little antenna patches, then it doesn't need to physically track anything. At most it would just need to rotate along the plane of the panel.

[Anonymous No.10940844]

>>10940836
I thought phased array was already confirmed

[Anonymous No.10940883]

As someone who saw the train in all its glory, anyone complaining about them ruining the sky can fuck off

[Anonymous No.10940896]

>>10940836
>filename

[Anonymous No.10940905]

Eurocucks hate SpaceX because SpaceX is killing their Ariannespace and undermining ESA, whom they try to view as equal to NASA.

[Sage No.10940992]

>>10940691
thanks for the red circle
wouldn't have seen it otherwise

[Anonymous No.10941043]

>>10940905
No one’s that deluded.

[Anonymous No.10941064]

>>10941043
Its pride, everyone has it.

[Anonymous No.10941095]

>>10940235
>>10940231
Cameron wanted to do Avatar originally in like 2004, but the motion capture tech was not even close to ready yet. Then after 2009 avatar he wanted to do the sequels starting in 2012 and finishing in 2014 but it turned out underwater 3d capture technology wasn't ready yet, so he's waited and put a shitload of money into developing that. Now that tech is workable and they're filming i think 4 sequels all at once or something? I just want the blue titties, man.

[Anonymous No.10941097]

>>10940905
I like SpaceX
t. European

[Anonymous No.10941112]

>>10940815
Their culture has been irreparably altered due to the plastic shit washing up on shore for the last >50 years. Some lights in the sky won't do anything.

[Anonymous No.10941146]

>>10936200

[Anonymous No.10941252]

>>10940210
L-lewd

[Anonymous No.10941253]

>MAXIMUM
>SALT

https://twitter.com/greg_wyler/status/1168988584818425857

[Anonymous No.10941275]

>>10941253
lol WhineWeb

[Anonymous No.10941291]

>>10941253
>5 months in and 5 satellites deorbiting - already a near disaster.
What is he referring to?

[Anonymous No.10941292]

>>10941253
god damn that is like caesium fluoride levels of salt

[Anonymous No.10941298]

>>10941291
Starlink.
This dude hates Musk since he thinks Musk stole his idea or something.

[Anonymous No.10941299]

>>10941291
>5 deorbiting
Several of the spaceX test sats were duds and are being brought down. Something to be expected when you launch >60 prototypes at once.
>near disaster
he's talking about that 'near collision' (really just a hazard avoidance maneuver that ESA got stinky about), he's being disingenuous.

[Anonymous No.10941303]

>>10941298
Starlink is being deorbited already? Why?

[Anonymous No.10941304]

>>10941303
only a couple. Some as a test, some are dead. Jon McDowell has some good charts of all 60 and what they're up to if you're interested

[Anonymous No.10941305]

>>10941299
Oh, I guess I should've waited one more minute. lol Thanks.

[Anonymous No.10941562]

>>10939917
You can go up in a MIG for $10k or whatever. There'll be a market. The ride might even be more fun than BO

[Anonymous No.10941605]

The next space wargame starts tomorrow. You'd think it sounds cool just on the name alone but it looks boring based on the press release.
http://www.leonarddavid.com/space-wargame-scenario-2029/

[Anonymous No.10941624]

>>10941605
It's cool and exciting but only so long as you realize and acknowledge space war is basically cyberwarfare with ASATs

[Anonymous No.10941638]

>>10941146
Thankfully they'll get TS force winds at worst, so everything should be business as usual once the storm passes.