/sfg/ - Spaceflight General

[Anonymous No.11066471]

The 'we paid 250 million dollars and our astronauts look fucking Teletubbies' edition.

Previously on /sfg/:
>>11061332

[Anonymous No.11066503]

Useful links:

https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/

[Anonymous No.11066520]

>falling for the NASA lie

[Anonymous No.11066538]

>>11066471
>the obligatory 'Murica color scheme

[Anonymous No.11066545]

>>11066538
Looks more like Russian Federation.

[Anonymous No.11066564]

>>11066471
Shit, I should have went with:
>You may not like it but this is what peak performance looks like edition.

[Anonymous No.11066587]

Starship de geso~

[Anonymous No.11066612]

The suits look goofy, but they appear to be much easier to move around in, and that's all that matters.

[Anonymous No.11066639]

>>11066587
i want to violate that squid

[Anonymous No.11066649]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj6LYpZosRU
>>11066612
They may look easier to move around in, but that could be negated by just having the one size so the suit will be unnecessarily large/heavy on women and manlets.

I'm not convinced the mobility on the xEMU is greater than existing suits either and I don't want to wait eight years just to see how well they work on a lunar surface. My guess is that astronauts will still trip and fall over because most of the weight is in the portable life support system so they're top heavy.

[Anonymous No.11066656]

>>11066471
God the fucking metal tummy band looks so bad

[Anonymous No.11066658]

So what do we do if no commercial heavy lift is available by 2024?

[Anonymous No.11066663]

>>11066587
That's a big squid

[Anonymous No.11066664]

>>11066658
Buy lots of FHeavies

[Anonymous No.11066666]

>>11066664
But what if no commercial heavy lift is available by 2024?

[Anonymous No.11066667]

>>11066658
What Jim Bridenstine would you like me to quote because he seemingly contradicts himself every five minutes.
>>11066666
Be gone, Satan.

[Anonymous No.11066670]

>>11066666
>he's right because FH has a catastrophic RUD in 2023 and is grounded, Vulcan and New Glenn both stall, and Starship is in development hell

[Anonymous No.11066672]

>Bridenstine testifying before the house appropriations subcommittee on the moon landing proposal
https://youtu.be/d_Fjnwe2xv4

[Anonymous No.11066688]

>>11066672
House space reparations subcommittee when. How dare the government spend money on going to space while our brothers die in the streets.

[Anonymous No.11066701]

>>11066688
Ayo hol up

[Anonymous No.11066754]

https://youtu.be/dJ-04R_Zw6M

New NASA video, title is literally

>Space is hard

Ok which one of you was this?

[Anonymous No.11066755]

>>11066663
FOR YOU

[Anonymous No.11066790]

>>11066471
Actually I appreciate that they put function over form. Pic related looks cool but I doubt its as good.

[Anonymous No.11066796]

Let's say a ticket to Mars costs you a million bucks in the early days (1-5 synods) of BFR, which sounds about right to me. There are about 36m millionaires in the world, how many of these would want to go to Mars? I would guess a comfortable 1/100, in reality it's probably a lot less than that.

Now you are down to 360,000. Out of those 360,000 how many are useless fucks, boomers about to keel over and/or people without any relevant trade skills (electrical, plumbing, pipefitting, construction, etc). I would say we are looking at another 1/100 again.

This means if you have some assets, inherit some assets and/or save like a motherfucker for 10-20 years while you learn a set of practical trade skills you are up against around 3600 other people for a ticket. I reckon that's some pretty fucking good odds, especially since by the time they have done a few synods sending the best of the best of the best and they are down to normies they will be sending a few hundred a synod easy if not more.

Fuck bros I have a lot of trade skills and no debt, I'm thinking I could make it. Anyone else seriously thinking about it?

[Anonymous No.11066797]

>>11066790
Skinsuit will be infinitely superior once they get off their asses and get a design sorted, admittedly it's pretty tough. There is literally zero downsides to a tensile suit and a fuck load of upsides.

[Anonymous No.11066802]

Going to another body would only be cool if you were an actual astronaut and not some rich fucker who has to be babied along the whole time.

[Anonymous No.11066805]

>>11066802
Fortunately rich fuckers will be on the waiting list for a while. You can't send useless takers to Mars/Luna/wherever, you need competent people who can build and maintain shit.

[Anonymous No.11066827]

>>11066471
>No zipper for peeing
How do they do it?

[Anonymous No.11066833]

>>11066827
>Unzip pants
>Flop dick out
>Try to piss
>Piss goes solid inside your dick
>Blood inside dick starts to boil

Or you could just piss into a ULA certified astronaut waste bag!™

[Anonymous No.11066882]

>>11066587
Why not pleasure the squidgirl with a miniature starship

[Anonymous No.11066885]

https://youtu.be/IG7DOaoWplk
https://youtu.be/7WGR2NWnq9k
>this is gonna be real soon
Fuck I'm excited, little me would've been sperging out.

[Anonymous No.11066921]

>>11066885
>LEGO Mars game
That takes me back

[Anonymous No.11066924]

>>11066471
I think the color scheme is what really makes it awkward, the original EMU wasn't exactly flattering to the figure either and it was a lot more busy in terms of hoses and bullshit that gets in the way. Give the xEMU the mirrored visor, get rid of the stupid paint scheme, and adjust the pants so there isn't so much extra material and it would look fine. I think the baggy legs might be because the suit is not adjusted for her height.

[Anonymous No.11066971]

>>11066924
>I think the color scheme is what really makes it awkward

The colour scheme is likely just because it’s a prototype, all the test suits have had wacky colour schemes. I believe the bright colours are there to make it easier to see during underwater testing in the NBL. The renders of xEMU on the Moon have it in a all-white Apollo-style paint job.

[Anonymous No.11066973]

>>11066471
>woman

[Anonymous No.11066990]

>>11066971
>grey Apollo-style covered in moon dirt

[Anonymous No.11067088]

>>11066471
Any news on SpaceX starship 20km test?

[Anonymous No.11067101]

>>11067088
Never ever

[Anonymous No.11067253]

>>11066790
>You versus the guy she tells you not to worry about.

[Anonymous No.11067257]

>>11067253

[Anonymous No.11067300]

>>11067257
It's okay, you have to confront your feelings. Come out the space suit closet and shout to the world 'tight is right'.

[Anonymous No.11067345]

>>11066754
Ive seen it in Michoud. Starship is just a paper rocket. SLS is REAL.

[Anonymous No.11067356]

>>11067345
Even if Michoud is the best thing about our faggot state, they've been dragging ass for too long. Elon's trash can has already logged more flight time than SLS, and it was a fucking tank on stilts.

[Anonymous No.11067406]

>>11066471
Not nearly enough pockets. Also
>let's make it even HARDER to bend at the waist!
lmao

[Anonymous No.11067430]

>>11066796
Even if colonization is the goal, the first hundreds of people will just be scientists who wont have to pay out of their own pocket.

[Anonymous No.11067463]

>>11066754
I burst out laughing when youtube recommended me that.
Seriously. What fucking meme magic is this?

[Anonymous No.11067469]

>>11066471
What's with the parachute pants?

[Anonymous No.11067475]

>>11066754
>>11067463
You do know that “space is hard” is a really commonly used phrase in the space community and not a meme, right? It gets used literally every time something fails (which is often in the space industry) as a sort of verbal pat on the back.

[Anonymous No.11067483]

>>11066754
>But it's HAAARD!
Cease with this defeatist attitude immediately.
Getting across the US used to carry a significant risk of horrible death either by cold or dehydration or malnutrition, now the entire country is covered in roads and railways and flown over every minute by aircraft.

[Anonymous No.11067487]

>>11066545
clearly standing in front of an american flag

[Anonymous No.11067492]

>>11066796
if were talking legit colonization, i could see spacex just hiring people into the company to go an do the work.

[Anonymous No.11067496]

>>11066754
Oh shit! Someone better go back in time to tell NASA that space is hard before they commit to Apollo.

[Anonymous No.11067517]

>>11067487
The colors on the suit though look more like those of the RF flag than the US one. Our flag has many layered red and white stripes while the Russian flag is just three simple red/white/blue bars. Also the only red on blue in our flag is where the background for the stars has to touch the horizontal stripes, in the RF flag the red and blue bars are stacked one against the other, like on the suit's forearms. Honestly they should have made it uncolored with orange trim like an X-plane, or just plain white like the Apollo version, with a US flag and NASA patches on the shoulder or chest out of the way. If visibility was a concern it should have been black and white checkers or black and orange checkers.

[Anonymous No.11067537]

>>11067483
Unfortunately. That "space is hard" defeatist attitude is both tied with the safety oriented mindset of NASA and the severe cuts NASA went through after Apollo. Arguing "damn the risks" makes one sound like they want people to die in the face of the safty culture of American spaceflight. To that culture, any increase in risk is unacceptable. And also NASA is still seen as the most capable space agency in the US, so to most if NASA can't do something then no one can. Unfortunately since NASA has been held back for decades being unable to do stuff, this leaves the impression that spaceflight is very difficult.

Not that merely accepting that "space is hard" is the only option (obviously not, it needs to change), but changing a mindset that has persisted and been reinforced for decades is going to be challenging. The only way to fix that is to actually demonstrate that space isn't hard and that some risks are acceptable, but that takes time.

It really does need to change though. Tired of seeing interesting ideas that are remotely ambiguous get shot down because "space is hard". It kills excitement and interest in spaceflight, something that has been a niche interest.

[Anonymous No.11067557]

>>11067537
Agreed, although NASA is seen as the only competent space agency because it's literally the ONLY space agency. Nobody else does launchers, and probes, and manned flight, and orbital assembly, etc. SpaceX and Blue are almost exclusively focused on launch systems and crewed flight, most other launchers are either vehicle exclusive or aerospace companies who's biggest field is something besides space, like cockheed or boeing who's profit mostly comes from atmospheric aircraft and military RnD. There really isn't any private space agency yet per-say, those companies with the resources to do it are mostly focused on other stuff, while all other companies just don't have the resources to do it period.

[Anonymous No.11067654]

>>11067300
>All the dangly bits and pinch points to get caught on parts of the spacecraft you're on eva from

[Anonymous No.11067673]

Planetary protection will break the private camel's back.

Lots of movement under the radar.

[Anonymous No.11067677]

>>11067483
the technological chasm from building a contintental railroad to interplanetary spaceflight is huge. People call it a new frontier but it's really a whole other realm. Going to the other end and saying space is easy is just extreme hubris. for that reason, as long as no one gets hurt, I will be feeling pretty smug seeing the Musk tweets after the starship program has its first major fuckup.

[Anonymous No.11067681]

>safety oriented mindset
>SpaceX - 3 hours ago - Here's How NOT To Explode A Whole Spaceship And Kill 12 Astronauts (Big Boomies)

[Anonymous No.11067688]

>>11067677
>feeling smug after starship crash
I'm feeling quite smug right now knowing that even absolute brainlets like you know it's gonna fly.

[Anonymous No.11067690]

>>11067537
It's kind of hard to attack NASA for being autistic about safety after their last crewed spacecraft killed 14 people.

[Anonymous No.11067691]

Safety must always be number one priority when dealing with human life. If there's any risk at all you shouldn't be doing it. Period.

[Anonymous No.11067707]

>>11067677
And that kind of attitude kills interest in spaceflight. Instead of focusing on what makes spaceflight hard, we should focus on the solutions.

>I will be feeling pretty smug seeing the Musk tweets after the starship program has its first major fuckup.
Just how some people felt smug believing that SpaceX couldn't reuse rockets? Give them a chance to try even if the risks are high. At the worst, we would learn of how not to do something and then shift focus on what can work.

[Anonymous No.11067709]

>>11067483
America has had people living there for thousands of years, space hasn't.

[Anonymous No.11067720]

>>11067691
>If there's any risk at all you shouldn't be doing it. Period.
Uh, so humans shouldn't be doing many of the tasks they do on a daily basis? Did you drive to work today? You're more likely to die in a car accident than in any other way, if you're of a certain age group. Everything can kill you. Exploration is always risky.

It would have been pretty hard for us to figure out how to sail across the ocean if not a single person could die.

[Anonymous No.11067725]

>>11067720
Daily activities and the associated risks are a very different thing from suicidal vanity projects ran by the government. Next time rocket crashes and kills people try to tell the world its the same as car crash and see what happens.

[Anonymous No.11067726]

>>11067707
uh, no it doesn't. It's the same outlook as the ideology of Apollo, which is the correct approach. Not sclerotic like 21st century nasa, not conceited and vain like SpaceX.

Reusing and precisely landing rockets is super impressive and personally I never attacked spacex about that. The problem is that they have gotten too full of themselves and Musk especially is jeopardising the success of the starship project with the approach he is forcing on it. Apollo was ambitious and robust. the starship program is delusional and reckless in its current state.

[Anonymous No.11067728]

>>11067725
>Next time rocket crashes and kills people try to tell the world its the same as car crash and see what happens
I'm pretty sure that's roughly what happened after Apollo 1. People were told to quit the witch hunt for who to blame and get back to work.

[Anonymous No.11067731]

>>11067726
>the starship program is delusional and reckless in its current state.
How so?

[Anonymous No.11067733]

>>11067731
Sensitive rocket hardware is being built out in the open.

[Anonymous No.11067738]

>>11067677
>I will be feeling pretty smug seeing the Musk tweets after the starship program has its first major fuckup.

It is time to accept that people will die colonizing Mars. A price worth paying.

[Anonymous No.11067739]

>>11067733
Weren't the engines and avionics built in a factory? Plus, SpaceX needs their parts to be robust to both handle the trip to Mars and a trip back to be reused with minimal refurbishment, if their parts can't handle sitting out in a construction zone for a couple of days/weeks then that's not a part SpaceX would be using.

[Anonymous No.11067743]

>>11067733
Engines are not built out in the open. The rest of the hardware is not sensitive. Also, building unmanned prototypes out in the open is entirely acceptable.

[Anonymous No.11067748]

>>11067725
You're shifting the goal posts. You implied we shouldn't go to space or do anything if it's risky at all and now you're implying some risk is okay but using some arbitrary definition to separate the two.
>Next time rocket crashes and kills people try to tell the world its the same as car crash and see what happens.
It is the same, the product of an acceptable risk someone decided to take. We shouldn't encourage moral panic and media theater when people taking an acceptable amount of risk die in exploration when no one would blink to here some stranger died hiking deep in the wilderness.

[Anonymous No.11067749]

>>11067733
Considering this "sensitive hardware" will sit on Mars for two years, SpaceX approach objectively is the correct one.

[Anonymous No.11067762]

>>11067733
If it's too sensitive to build in a field, it's too sensitive to repair on Mars. Safety through robustness.

[Anonymous No.11067789]

>>11067738
There would be a large difference between , for example ripping your suit because of an exposed sharp rock on mars, to dying during re-entry because of a violent trajectory. One is an accident and one is not. One is unfortunate and one is dangerous.

>>11067731
>orbital refuelling? Easy
>radiation? Builds character!
>no redundant critical flight elements
>selling it as competition for passenger aircraft
>orbital flight in mid 2020
>landing a 100+ ton dildo shaped vehicle on some retractable stumps and sitting it there for years
>basing the viability of returning home on transforming the surface of mars into rocket fuel
There's a billion little things. The point is they have got ahead of themselves especially musk. No shame in admitting this. They have one feather in their cap and that is landing the FH boosters. The rest is marketing and ideology

[Anonymous No.11067797]

>>11067749
>>11067762
You actually believe something like starship is going to reach mars when its proven so difficult to send toy car sized rovers there?

[Anonymous No.11067807]

>>11067789
>>radiation? Builds character!

Starship as proposed is one of the most conservative Mars mission proposals when it comes to radiation. The combination of a fast trajectory and enough mass budget for a nice solar storm shelter will mean it has less exposure than either NASA DRMs or Zubrin's proposals.

[Anonymous No.11067808]

>>11067797
Yes. There is no technical showstopper.

[Anonymous No.11067812]

>>11067789
>dying during re-entry because of a violent trajectory

Did you miss that the plan is to land at least two unmanned Starships before sending in a manned one? Mars reentry will be tested in practice.

[Anonymous No.11067829]

>>11067789
>>orbital refuelling? Easy
It has been done for decades.

>>radiation? Builds character!
IIRC SpaceX plans on making the trip to Mars short enough to where radiation isn't that big of an issue. And if it turns out that it is a larger problem than expected then SpaceX has shown to be willing to change significant parts of their mission and hardware to meet their goals.

>>no redundant critical flight elements
Such as? I'm pretty sure Starship has enough redundancies with the hardware we've seen.

>>selling it as competition for passenger aircraft
E2E is more of a side dream rather than their real goal of Mars.

>>orbital flight in mid 2020
An ambitious deadline that may not be met, but Starship does seem like it will reach orbit eventually.

>>landing a 100+ ton dildo shaped vehicle on some retractable stumps and sitting it there for years
What's wrong with that? SpaceX seems to have propulsive landings worked out, and if there is a problem then they will adapt to it. Again, they've shown to be willing to accept radical changes in design. If you have paid attention to BFR development then you would be aware of this.

>>basing the viability of returning home on transforming the surface of mars into rocket fuel
You mean like every other manned Mars mission? You mean that level of technology that has been worked out for years?

>There's a billion little things. The point is they have got ahead of themselves especially musk
Musk is an ad man, he wants to hype up SpaceX to get more customers for them. The actual engineering behind SpaceX has proven itself to be capable irregardless of what Musk says.

>No shame in admitting this. They have one feather in their cap and that is landing the FH boosters. The rest is marketing and ideology
Yes, there will be challenges and unknowns that SpaceX will have to deal with, but instead of doubting them and expecting them to fail, how about you have some hope in them. They're trying to push the boundaries of spaceflight.

[Anonymous No.11067831]

>>11067797
Why not? "It's hard" isn't a good argument for something being impossible. Landing rockets is hard, too.

[Anonymous No.11067832]

>>11067677
>I will be feeling pretty smug seeing the Musk tweets after the starship program has its first major fuckup.
out of curiosity: have you ever built anything? like ever, in your whole life? or is your entire worth, your only achievement, your entire contribution to human endeavor, "feeling pretty smug" about things?

[Anonymous No.11067835]

>tfw the rush and elation of the last 2 years is over and it's going to be years before we see something big like the reusable landings

[Anonymous No.11067845]

>>11067835
There's still stuff to look forward to.
>reusable landings of larger rockets
>multiple launch providers moving for reuse
>neat space experiments and demonstrations that were made possible by cheaper launches
>Mars and beyond
>Space Force being fully realized
And more that I'm probably missing, but that should be the "immediate" future.

[Anonymous No.11067847]

>>11067835
Wat? 2020 is the year of the Starship flight test program. 20km hop, first orbit, first Superheavy, rockets being built in fields, Starlink online...

[Anonymous No.11067850]

>>11067847
>20km hop
>2020

nope

[Anonymous No.11067857]

>>11067835
we can look forward to THIS in a month or so

https://i.imgur.com/LIJciAd.gifv

[Anonymous No.11067862]

>>11067850
Don't forget about the FAA and their bullshit trickery

[Anonymous No.11067905]

>>11067807
It's still a shitload of msv and it's not a great look when you see Musk answer questions about lifesupport with 'uh, er, Crew Dragon, uh pretty easy' when they haven't launched any astronauts into space and that vehicle has exploded. If instead of powerpoint slides about 20 minutes across the Pacific, talking about same day reuse of orbital rockets and so forth, we saw this stuff addressed in depth, there wouldn't be a point to criticise. There's also no real talk about years of very low gravity. Those astronauts are going to get quite sick.
>>11067812
No, I didn't. I didn't miss either that Mars is a spacecraft graveyard and that starship as proposed would be by far the largest and most technically complicated landing spacecraft. Anything goes wrong with the propulsion system, rcs, or especially the flaps and it will be messy. It will very likely fail hard before it works and that's ok but it would be nice to see more acknowledgement of that instead of dick stroking about getting to Mars before NASA gets to the Moon.

[Anonymous No.11067916]

>>11067829
>>11067829
>It has been done for decades.
Gassing up a space station and filling up an interplanetary spacecraft are totally different beasts.
>Such as?
Engines and flaps have to go off without a hitch for everything to work.
>more of a side dream
Exactly my point. Yet it is feeding into this hysteria regardless
>An ambitious deadline that may not be met, but Starship does seem like it will reach orbit eventually.
Imagine if I were to say the same thing about Artemis 3. Heresy!
>What's wrong with that?
Mars entry and landing on this scale especially is even harder than on Earth. Yet it's brushed off as having been worked out already.
>You mean like every other manned Mars mission?
I don't see why you couldn't design a beefed up Apollo architecture and avoid having to cook fuel. For initial missions. Yuge CSM craft to ferry the whole vehicle to mars, and a smaller lander element to reach the surface, carry cargo and guys, and rendezvous with the mothership and return home.
>Musk is an ad man
Also my point. But heaps of fanboys are drinking the koolaid anyway.
>how about you have some hope in them
I do hope they succeed. But it's hard to be a cheerleader when their face is so conceited.

Here is my broader point which underlines all of the above. NASA is finished building a gigantic moon rocket and all you see about it is either nothing or claims that it won't fly. SpaceX is years behind reaching that stage and if all you had was second hand information you could be forgiven for thinking that Elon Musk has already built a mars colony. It's ideology.

[Anonymous No.11067921]

>>11067832
Of course I have. I'm pretty good at it too. However I do enjoy a chuckle when people gloat about things they haven't achieved yet and it goes a bit pear shaped.

[Anonymous No.11067932]

>>11066471
Of all the retarded metrics by which one might evaluate a spacesuit, the extent to which they resemble a Teletubby has got to be the most retarded.

[Anonymous No.11067933]

>>11067789
>The point is they have got ahead of themselves especially musk.
Musk now sees a clear path and he REALLY wants to walk it. We'll see how much he throws at this and how much things will accelerate based off of that.
We'll see how much the little details slow them down. Especially keeping in mind that a lot of this can be improved incrementally over time. They can start just lifting sats and hauling cargo to Mars or whatever. Dear Moon is only a few people so there's a lot of room for life support.
They don't need it to be a 100% certified 50+ people Mars colony ship from the get-go.

I guess we'll see if their landing maneuver works out at all in the coming months.

[Anonymous No.11067934]

>>11066545
>>11066538
Bunch of countries have r/w/b flags -- NASA is cleverly setting up to sell the suit to Thailand, Russia, France, Bongistan, Costa Rica, Cambodia, etc.

[Anonymous No.11067939]

>>11067905
>Anything goes wrong with the propulsion system, rcs, or especially the flaps and it will be messy

Starship is supposed to have dozens of Earth reentries before any Mars reentries, and even more before any manned Mars reentries. By the time it lands people on Mars, it will be the best tested spacecraft ever.

[Anonymous No.11067940]

>>11066688
And Whitey ain't even on the moon anymore.

[Anonymous No.11067944]

>>11067932
t. NASA suit designer

[Anonymous No.11067945]

>>11067905
>There's also no real talk about years of very low gravity. Those astronauts are going to get quite sick.

We don't know the effects of Martian gravity, so there is little to talk about. This is one area where they will just have to try it to know. However, the effects of microgravity are not as bad as many people think:

https://spacenews.com/resistive-targeted-exercise-reversed-astronauts-bone-loss-study-finds/

>Typically, astronauts would return to Earth with a total of 4 percent to 5 percent of their body mass gone.

>“Now, it’s a rule to have it more or less unchanged,” Barratt said. “We’re seeing insignificant changes in bone density. We’re actually seeing an increase in lean body mass and decrease in body fat.

[Anonymous No.11067947]

>>11066802
You are wrong. It would still be cool to go. Id go tomorrow, though I have zero skills of any sort.

>>11066805
>You can't send useless takers to Mars/Luna/wherever, you need competent people who can build and maintain shit.

Unless you want their money to pay the bills while shit is being built and maintained.

[Anonymous No.11067949]

>>11067916
>I don't see why you couldn't design a beefed up Apollo architecture and avoid having to cook fuel.

Because it would cost untold billions for a mere flag and footprints mission at best? This is not a sustainable, rational approach.

[Anonymous No.11067953]

>>11066924
>get rid of the stupid paint scheme

That's Patriotism Bait, for funding.

But, some use of color would be fine with me. Might as well look good while you hop across the moon.

[Anonymous No.11067954]

>>11067916
An assumption that you're making is that once SpaceX builds something, then the thing and the mission is set in stone and they're going to proceed as-is. That's not how SpaceX works. They make and interate on prototypes. They test as they fly. Which is very different than how most (American) aerospace has been done.

They're not going to be throwing Mk1 at Mars the moment it's built. They'll test it out in limited but useful conditions and then build upon that. Eventually getting a Starship to orbit, then the moon, and then Mars. Martian reentry and landing is going to be tricky and SpaceX probably hasn't figured everything out yet, but their general plan is to figure it out by actually sending stuff there to test it.

[Anonymous No.11067956]

>>11067101
Did the top fall off again?

[Anonymous No.11067961]

>>11067469
It's a little thing called "style."

[Anonymous No.11067972]

>>11067728
>I'm pretty sure that's roughly what happened after Apollo 1. People were told to quit the witch hunt for who to blame and get back to work.

That is totally incorrect. There was a "witch hunt," if you want to cal it that, to find out EXACTLY who fucked up, why, how, and what to do about it. Nobody "got back to work" until they had determined all of that, and corrected for it.

[Anonymous No.11067979]

>giving (You)s to the schitzo
nice job newfriends

[Anonymous No.11067986]

>>11067829
>>landing a 100+ ton dildo shaped vehicle on some retractable stumps and sitting it there for years
>What's wrong with that?

Different guy, but the problem seems to me to be balancing in a relatively precarious position for a long time.

Which is not to say that the problem can;t be solved. But it seems a possible weakness in the current "plans."

(Plans in quotes not to be disparaging, but to acknowledge that "plans" at this stage are of necessity somewhat more aspirational than operational.)

[Anonymous No.11067991]

>>11067905
the explosion was because they had oxidizer in their titanium plumbing, it didn't have anything to do with the life support system

[Anonymous No.11067996]

>>11067845
>>Space Force being fully realized

Ain't going to happen. It's now the hostage to the personal popularity of a very controversial politician. Don;t want to get into /pol/ territory, so will stop there.

[Anonymous No.11068001]

>>11067979
This site is overrun with redditors
A shame they weren't burned out when they could have been

[Anonymous No.11068002]

>>11067916
>But it's hard to be a cheerleader when their face is so conceited.

I can;t see why anybody wants to be a cheerleader or a hater.

They are doing things that are cool as fuck, and they have aspirations that are even more so. But they are a company, a corporation, in business -- they are not Space Jesus.

Criticizing them is not an attack -- criticisms can be a very cheap way to catch a mistake BEFORE the gigantic orange fireball.

[Anonymous No.11068015]

>>11067954
>An assumption that you're making is that once SpaceX builds something, then the thing and the mission is set in stone and they're going to proceed as-is. That's not how SpaceX works. They make and interate on prototypes. They test as they fly. Which is very different than how most (American) aerospace has been done.

Interestingly, what you describe is a lot like how NASA operated during the Golden Age. Each new LM or Gemini Capsule was tweaked for any new mission needs, and new ideas that somebody came up with, and things they had learned on an earlier mission.

[Anonymous No.11068016]

>>11067996
I guess I should've been more clear. I know that the Space Force is tied to Trump in the eye of the public (let's leave it there), but there will be a need of some dedicated organization within the US government focused on protecting US space assets. This will be a need because for all of spaceflight history regulations were done on Earth and enforced on the few who have acess to space. However, the ability to access space is being more common, and more importantly being gained by groups who can't be regulated on Earth by the US and don't share the same ideologies and views. This means that US space hardware will be vulnerable to such groups who may seek to take advantage of the fact that space is pretty much lawless right now. Either by claiming orbits that the US was interested in, or by more malicious acts such as targeting spy satellites. The Space Force that was started by Trump may be unpopular to some, but the need of a space force is still there.

[Anonymous No.11068019]

>>11067991
So if you had been in the life support system at the time, you'd have been fine? Asking sincerely, I am not knowledgeable about that incident.

[Anonymous No.11068023]

>>11068019
No, the explosion cracked the pressure vessel. But the failure was in the abort system.

[Anonymous No.11068024]

florida stacking

[Anonymous No.11068066]

Were there any other untethered EVAs in history apart from the Apollo lunar surface and the few Shuttle missions using pic related?

[Anonymous No.11068102]

>>11068066
no

[Anonymous No.11068109]

>>11067956
No it's being taken apart for tubing and internal work. Livestream here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aDOpyUmfL4

[Anonymous No.11068116]

Space junk people are freaking out about this

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/10/spacex-might-launch-another-30000-broadband-satellites-for-42000-total/

How realistic are their fears?

[Anonymous No.11068122]

>>11068116
like, 3/10
some of the higher orbit stuff is never going to happen for the reasons they're talking about, but everything below 600 km isn't going to cause the doomsday they're screeching about

[Anonymous No.11068138]

>>11068116
Somewhat justified, it's a shitload of stuff to launch, but it's also in low orbit so will deorbit pretty fast.

[Anonymous No.11068148]

>>11066797
Main current problem is the need for custom foam inserts in certain spots on the body. As the suit cannot properly apply pressure on them. Which creates low pressure spots on the body.

[Anonymous No.11068155]

>>11068138
>but it's also in low orbit so will deorbit pretty fast.

That’s what the Indians said when they did their ASAT test, but the reality is when a collision occurs some of the debris gets launched into higher orbits. 45% of the debris they said would deorbit in 3 months is still up there because of this.

[Anonymous No.11068172]

>>11066471
This suit appears to still have the whole "suit as an airlock" thing that the Z series had, where you crawl in from the back and leave the suit outside the base/vehicle.
If that's still the case, how does the bulky life support pack work? It doesn't appear to be built into the suit, but rather attached to the back on little offsets. How do they get into the suit and then attach the life support pack?

[Anonymous No.11068174]

>>11068155
Difference between a fucking missile and a collision between satellites mate.

[Anonymous No.11068177]

>>11067496

[Anonymous No.11068184]

>>11068174
Something, manmade or natural, could come in from a higher orbit and whack into one. Which would scatter debris into unpredictable orbits where it might linger for a long time.

It's a fairly safe and manageable plan, but there is a non zero chance of a serious debris problem.

[Anonymous No.11068185]

>>11067857
>https://i.imgur.com/LIJciAd.gifv
>in a month or so

[Anonymous No.11068187]

>>11068184
Why would it send debris up? Wouldn't both vectors be pointed either down, or along an orbit?

[Anonymous No.11068188]

>>11068185
Stupid Emilia poster

[Anonymous No.11068190]

>>11068187
Yes he is retarded, comparing some kind of micrometeor going down towards the earth and a fucking missile going at warp 9 directly upward with an explosive warhead is not even remotely comparable.

[Anonymous No.11068192]

>>11067673
It depresses me that you're so right. The increasing move towards communism in academia makes people detest private spaceflight. Planetary protection will be the main hammer they can use to destroy private spaceflight. The Marxist academics are already gearing up under the surface to use it.

[Anonymous No.11068199]

>first all female spacewalk tomorrow
YASSS KWEEN SLAYY

[Anonymous No.11068237]

>>11068199
So progressive, this will truly lead us into a new era of spaceflight

[Anonymous No.11068238]

>>11068187
You don't need either vector to be pointed up or down to fling debris into a higher orbit.
The recent Indian ASAT missile was flying more or less parallel and retrograde to it's target when it struck, but much of the debris still got scattered into higher orbits. The debris' perigee can't get any higher from the impact but it's apogee definitely can. Even with a low perigee, the object will spend most of it's time at higher altitudes and thus take longer to deorbit. Not to mention the risk of the debris field striking other satellites.

If you want to argue that up/down vector point though, you could have an object swing in with a perigee below the satellite's, then strike one as it was on it's way back "up."

As I said before, it's a manageable risk. That risk does increase the more satellites you have though.

[Anonymous No.11068247]

>>11068238
>The debris' perigee can't get any higher from the impact but it's apogee definitely can.
This makes perfect sense thanks.

[Anonymous No.11068267]

>>11068247
no, not really
the only way debris goes very far up is if something explodes

[Anonymous No.11068300]

>>11068267
That’s what tends to happen when satellites collide at orbital velocity....

Also a heads up for you guys, the legal challenges to SpaceX’s 30,000 satellite filing are already pouring in. I’ve seen ones from Kepler and SES already and their pretty brutal...

[Anonymous No.11068307]

>>11068300
>Legal challenges

Absolutely seething, doesn't matter if they don't get permission now. Once their initial approved constellation is up they can grease the wheels with a few billion and get the rest approved.

[Anonymous No.11068308]

>>11068267
It doesn't need to go up, even accelerating it on it's orbit will make it spend more time in orbit being dangerous far longer then the original satellite would.

[Anonymous No.11068338]

>>11067691
Hope you don't drive, then.

[Anonymous No.11068353]

>>11068300
>kepler communications
Gee, I wonder what they would have to gain financially by smothering all competition through legal jewry

[Anonymous No.11068360]

>>11068338
Yeah driving is dangerous as fuck. Hopping on a rocket and coming back down once a year is probably safer than a year of driving.

[Anonymous No.11068379]

>>11068267
shut the fuck up retard you're embarrassing yourself

[Anonymous No.11068391]

>>11068360
literally a day ago I was stopped at a stop sign waiting for some grandma to turn left onto my road and she cut the corner too sharp looking to her right instead of where she was going and she ALMOST clipped me, if I hadn't been on a hill and paying attention I wouldn't've let off the brake and rolled back in time to dodge her
fucking grandma drivers man, I trust a computer to land me on a pad from the upper atmosphere and moving at thousands of miles an hour waaaay before I trust retard old people in cars to not smash my shit

[Anonymous No.11068469]

>>11068379
where does the energy come from?

[Anonymous No.11068482]

>>11067487
DELETE THIS

[Anonymous No.11068494]

Where the fuck are the drawfags, we need thicc Starship Chan

[Anonymous No.11068499]

>>11068469
From the orbits of the incoming objects, and any debris that gets deflected retrograde.

[Anonymous No.11068504]

>>11068494
>thicc
no thicc or I'll kill you

[Anonymous No.11068510]

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/16/nasa-musk-weed-048099
kek

[Anonymous No.11068523]

>>11068510
>Burning 5 million taxpayer dollars because Musk took one puff and didn't even inhale

No wonder these cunts can't fucking do anything.

[Anonymous No.11068569]

Someone has to draw elon and bridenstine as anime girls lying on a bed playing a hugging

[Anonymous No.11068574]

>>11068569
Nah bridenstine should be a tsundere

>I-it's not like I want Starship to work anyway baka!

[Anonymous No.11068592]

>>11068510
I wonder if government agencies realize how much talent they miss out by being so anal about weed.

[Anonymous No.11068596]

>>11068592
drugs are bad mkay

[Anonymous No.11068614]

>>11066471
I'm somewhat interested in Planetology. Does anyone know a good book about it I could read? I've ran out of good books and want to read a book where I'll learn something more than just what is already written on wikipedia.

[Anonymous No.11068615]

>>11068148
Interesting. And what might the effect of a low pressure zone on the body be?

[Anonymous No.11068637]

>>11067835
Gaganyaan by ISRO

[Anonymous No.11068649]

>>11068615
uncomfortable swelling, skin irritation, and in severe cases, bruising
basically it's the world's worst hickey

[Anonymous No.11068661]

>>11068174
>>Difference between a fucking missile and a collision between satellites mate
there's little to no difference. You're still going to have a collision occurring at relative velocities of km/s. Even with about a 15 degree angle between velocity vectors, relative collision velocity's on the order of that of a tank shell. Whatever's colliding will turn into a cloud of debris.

[Anonymous No.11068666]

>>11066471
because it's one size fits all it's more amenable to mass production. It also makes renting a spacesuit on the moon possible. Aesthetics are for dumb fan boys. If all you care about's aesthetics go fap to star wars.

[Anonymous No.11068679]

>>11067483
Its a term used to downplay oldspace industry's incompetence for the last 50 years. Space WAS hard in the 60s. Now its easy.

[Anonymous No.11068691]

>>11068102

Guy who asked the question here. After a little checking, it turns out that your assertion is false: the SAFER (distinct from the MMU) was tested during STS-64 in 1994, ten years distant from the 1984 MMU missions.

[Anonymous No.11068748]

Does the Enzmann starship look silly or cool?

[Anonymous No.11068792]

>>11068019
If oxidizer was in the life support system you've got bigger issues

[Anonymous No.11068816]

>>11068614
unironically, read wikipedia

[Space junk laser platform No.11068860]

What is stopping us from putting a satellite in space that's just a big solar array and a precision aimed cutting laser that we use to vaporise space junk?.
We use existing ground installations for tracking.
It's basically a Hubble telescope with a big laser pointer in the lens.
I don't even think the cost would be unreasonable. It's not even very high tech.

[Anonymous No.11068869]

>>11068860
Literally nothing and also the US Navy has lasers on ships now. It's just six big fuck off commercial cutting lasers firing through a lens. Can sink small boats and blow up drones, hasn't been tested against anything faster yet afaik

[Anonymous No.11068873]

It's gonna happen and there's nothing oldspace can do to stop it.

[Anonymous No.11068878]

>>11068873
But what if Falcon Heavy isn't ready by 2024?

[Anonymous No.11068880]

>>11068878
I actually think that question is at least mildly relevant because a FH RUD could put it out of service for months

[Space junk laser platform No.11068910]

>>11068869
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/SEQ-3_Laser_Weapon_System

This is epic.

[Anonymous No.11068913]

>>11068873
This monstrosity cracks me up whenever I see it. Unfortunately with the order of 10 SLS cores it seems unlikely to happen.

[Anonymous No.11068916]

>https://www.marssociety.org/webcast/

FYI, mars society event talks are online and will continue for few more days.

[Anonymous No.11068924]

>>11067720

>the attitude that delays any and every advance

>finding this attitude on an anonymous congolese pickle dipping foruns

[Anonymous No.11068988]

>>11068913
>Not even assembled
>Can't pin down an actual launch date
>Absurdly overrun costs
>Outdated components
>Has one of the largest mission failure probabilities in spaceflight history
>"yeah we'll buy 10 more of those please"
Fuck it, we really do live in a clown world.

[Anonymous No.11068993]

The Columbia accident investigation report said that NASA helmets should not be designed with so much space because any impact can cause neck injury and a hard impact breaks the neck.

[Anonymous No.11069010]

>>11068916
Is the SpaceX rep there? And they are doing some kind of colony design contest right? When is that?

[Anonymous No.11069014]

>>11068988
>Has one of the largest mission failure probabilities in spaceflight history
wut

[Anonymous No.11069020]

>>11069010
Saturday. He's not just a "rep" but rather the "Principal Mars Development Engineer"

[Anonymous No.11069035]

>>11069020
>"Principal Mars Development Engineer"

God I wish that was me

[Anonymous No.11069043]

>>11068916
>Looking Mars Society schedule
>One of the presentations
>Banking for Mars

Ill wager the Hebrews are behind this.

[Anonymous No.11069051]

>>11068988
only one of those lines are true and it's money. Who cares. Drop in the ocean.

[Anonymous No.11069057]

>>11069043

[Anonymous No.11069064]

>>11068748
Plenty of spacecraft have spheres poking out, lots of hypothetical craft are mostly sphere or just a mostly featureless cylinder or cone. They look ungainly for atmospheric flight but they wouldn't need to be since most of the concepts I can see have a shuttle bay for atmospheric craft. They're too small for interstellar ships though unless you just want to hurl unmanned probes out there. Steel alone can easily get you ships multiple kilometers in diameter and length even if they're spinning fast enough to generate 1g faux gravity.

[Anonymous No.11069075]

>>11069043
They'll try and establish the first interplanetary bank, we'll have to get /x/ to show us how to summon the ghost of Andrew Jackson to put a stop to it.

[Anonymous No.11069116]

>>11069051
So SLS is on time and fully assembled according to you?

[Anonymous No.11069134]

>>11069064
The design does have interesting features on it that seem odd at first but are actually reasonably well thought out. Just wish that there was more information on what kind of engines it used. The "pulsed magnetic fusion" description of it along with it using deuterium as a fuel makes me think it's some breed of MTF like Thio, but idk.

[Anonymous No.11069168]

>>11069116
>fully assembled
Yes. Compared to starship it may as well be on the launch pad.
>on time
If you take the jim appointment and the announcement of the Artemis program as a starting point, then yeah, there hasn't been any delays of serious note since then. People will mention the fact that there are news articles talking about how it is delayed again to 2021, but this is necessary if they go the green run route. And has been accounted for for months, just not in the media. Which is a no brainer considering that Artemis 2 is not impacted whatsoever by a 2020 or 2021 launch.

[Anonymous No.11069187]

>>11069168
>compared to starship
How about compared to a rocket that's actually assembled?
>if you take the starting point to be after it was originally supposed to launch, it's on time
my dude

[Anonymous No.11069195]

[Anonymous No.11069261]

>>11066471

>seven children
>six flights
>alive
>doctor
>white
>Marine
>six degrees
>stalked by schizo woman with very good taste
>bald, appropriate to job

Perfect human beings don't exi.....

[Anonymous No.11069320]

>>11068869
it's six industrial cutting lasers slaved to some sort of robotic aiming device
they use it to blow up motorboat engines

[Anonymous No.11069329]

>>11069261
yeah no shit, that's an alien

[Anonymous No.11069354]

>>11069329

No, he's all-human, oddly enough. Neil A. was the A. lien.

[Anonymous No.11069356]

>>11066471
Earth is flat

[Anonymous No.11069417]

>>11069356
....and that's a good thing!

[Anonymous No.11069446]

>>11069417
Is there more of these?

[Anonymous No.11069482]

>>11068523
>https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/16/nasa-musk-weed-048099
It‘s even funnier considering they paid SpaceX money as a result of this. It‘s even more funny that this money may be approximately what a Starship prototype costs.

[Anonymous No.11069509]

>>11067483
The entire country is now covered with infrastructure because it's also covered with fertile soil and many useful ressources. Space travel hasn't been an issue since the 60s, the only reason we haven't colonized the moon is for the same reason we're not colonizing the sahara or antarctica, there is simply no economic incentive.

[Anonymous No.11069511]

>>11069509
We aren't colonising the Sahara because it's already claimed and you can't just go stake out some land and start mining resources. We aren't colonising Antarctica because it's fucking illegal under international treaty. If you opened up Antarctica to colonisation you would have company oil drilling towns inside a few months.

[Anonymous No.11069538]

Do you guys think we’ll be exploring space within our lifetimes or is it all just science fiction? It keeps me up at night knowing that adventure doesn’t exist anymore and I might never experience it.

[Anonymous No.11069544]

>>11069538
If starship meets most of its expectations and the government doesn't fuck space exploration with bullshit regulations and treaties then yes, 100% we space age nao.

If not then we are stuck on this planet forever as we are about to enter a terminal decline where everything goes to shit and we have used up all the easily available resources so we can't start again. Starship is quite literally our last hope to gtfo this shithole planet and our hopes are pinned on a slightly schizo autist building tin can rockets in a field. It's fun at least.

[Anonymous No.11069547]

>>11068615
>>11068649
And sweat collects in them.

[Anonymous No.11069556]

>>11066471
What's up with the bitch hips on the new unisex suits? lol

[Anonymous No.11069559]

>>11069511
Read whom i replied to and the kind of nonsensical comparison he made. The point is a few oil rigs and mining operations with a dozen people won't lead to another America. I refuse to call that colonization.

[Anonymous No.11069560]

which suit is best?

[Anonymous No.11069576]

>>11069560
The orange suit is for low orbit scram jet flights nothing more.
SpaceX white is also for temporary exposer to the vacuum of space in case of ruptures only.
Virgins blue suit looks like it could hold up for a solid hour or 2

I choose you blue!

[Anonymous No.11069588]

>>11069560
Very flattering angle on the SpaceX one. I personally think it looks kind of hideous, nothing in the Boeing one though, Jesus Christ.

[Anonymous No.11069592]

>>11069560
I personally like the Artemis OCSS suit on the right the best. It's like a nice streamlined version of the old Shuttle ACES suits.

[Anonymous No.11069594]

>>11069576
Is Beyond the Black Rainbow worth seeing? Will I like it if I liked Enter the Void?

[Anonymous No.11069622]

SLS will take women to Mars.

Deal with it.

[Anonymous No.11069627]

>>11069560
>That Boeing suit

Hehehe

Hahahahahaha

Ohohohohoho

Ohnonononononono

What a hideous piece of shit, who put that fucking plug right there? Holy shit.

[Anonymous No.11069638]

>>11069560

[Anonymous No.11069674]

>>11069594
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKCHXpSEtOU

[Anonymous No.11069697]

>>11069638
Kino

[Anonymous No.11069709]

>>11069560
SpaceX suit.

[Anonymous No.11069714]

>>11069560
Artemis > SpaceX > Boeing

SpaceX would've been the best if not for how they looked when worn by actual astronauts.

[Anonymous No.11069718]

>>11069714
It’s like I keep saying, they were made by the same company that makes costumes for Marvel movies. Therefore, it’s not surprising that you need to have the body of an A-list action star to look good in it.

[Anonymous No.11069726]

>>11069718
Behnken doesn't actually look that bad. If the stomach or waist area doesn't look too wide or is bit more busy, it would look much better.

[Anonymous No.11069727]

>>11069714
Check out the fattie on the right lmao.

[Anonymous No.11069770]

>>11069544
>have used up all the easily available resources so we can't start again.
Never heard of renewable resources? Also loads of stuff we need is still on or near the surface and reusable in one way or another. The party would be over in terms of the end of days level of profligacy with earth's resources we see today, but no superpower is giving up on space just yet.

[Anonymous No.11069819]

>>11069556
>

[Anonymous No.11069864]

>>11069560
I absolutely love the hard sci-fi look of Boeing's suit. It reminds me of something that Weyland-Yutani would make it's astronauts wear. Ugly, cheap, and functional.

SpaceX's suit OTOH is too tryhard in the looks dept, and the orange SR-71 suit is classic but a little dated.

[Anonymous No.11069883]

>>11069864
Boeing’s visor makes it look like a futuristic hazmat suit, which is what gives it the ‘Alien’ vibes.

[Anonymous No.11069888]

>>11069864
>Cheap

L

U

L

[Anonymous No.11069920]

Question. Does the future Crew Dragon in-flight abort test need fully fueled stages?

[Anonymous No.11069926]

>>11069920
I believe they will be using a dummy second-stage, with the same mass as a fully fuelled real one to simulate real conditions. The first-stage will also be fully fuelled because of this.

[Anonymous No.11069971]

>>11069888
Well, cheap once someone other than Boeing builds it...

[Anonymous No.11070086]

>NASA gave Boeing a cost-plus contract again
are they retarded?

[Anonymous No.11070158]

>>11069714
It's what the mask shape does when it's open. It gives them conehead... head... or something.

[Anonymous No.11070193]

>>11069714
Looks like they should be in one of those 2000-era Intel commercials. It's a crappy intersection of attempted style and the realities of what the pressure suit actually has to do.

[Anonymous No.11070258]

Scott Manley has a new video about that suit. He explains a bit about the whole suit port meme and how you get in and such.
https://youtu.be/VuCUEGxgo0U

[Anonymous No.11070265]

>>11070158
yeah, that mask is very clearly going for a Daft Punk look and it just doesn't work when open

[Anonymous No.11070280]

>>11069560
From best to worst. Right, Center, Left. The SpaceX suit looks really nice, but it looks more like a cosplay than an actual suit. The Boeing suit looks much better, but looks abit awkward in some place especially at the helmet. The NASA suit looks like a classic.

[Anonymous No.11070292]

Two girls are stowing red hooks on green reels rn on NASA TV

[Anonymous No.11070346]

So according to the Mars Society colonization talks, the only meats being considered for growth on Mars are insects, everything else is vegan. Doesn't this cause nutrient deficiencies? Yes. Yes it does. Yes you may need to import vitamin B12.

[Anonymous No.11070351]

>>11070346
A Martian colony can trade Martian grown bees to Earth for B12. It'll be called the Bees for B's Agreement.

[Anonymous No.11070365]

>>11070346
Lol, it’s a good thing then that most of Elon’s hardcore fans are basedboys, they’ll feel right at home.

[Anonymous No.11070395]

>>11070346
>insects
that's garbage, grow crustaceans

[Anonymous No.11070403]

>>11068880
>for months
So you're saying they'd have FH ready to fly again in time for the next launch anyway even if there were a big RUD? People forget that Artemis is gonna take a shitload of time, so much time that if it were using SpaceX rockets a gigantic RUD wouldn't even manifest as a significant delay to the program (unless that RUD takes out Artemis hardware obviously).

[Anonymous No.11070408]

>>11070346
It will assuming they refuse to supplement their diets. Realistically I'd want to launch a few tons of protein and vitamin supplements. It's not realistic to have colonists live off of only what they can grow, because what they can grow out there is going to be strictly limited for a long period of time at the current rate which material could be delivered to Mars. Mars is such a sterile, energy starved environment that the environmental footprint necessary to sustain humans with no supplementary stuff would be unworkable.

[Anonymous No.11070417]

>>11068873
the crazy thing is that there's really no structural or launch profile reason that this wouldn't work

[Anonymous No.11070431]

>>11069714
Where the fuck is the life support packs and hoses? The Artemis is designed for a pilot/astronaut to survive in the suit for 7 days.

NASA chose Artemis suits because god forbid you get a hull breach and interior ship becomes outer space. You could survive in your orange suit for a week as you get back to Earth.

Food, Water, Pissing, Poopin. Granted it would get full of piss and poop and be unbearable.

[Anonymous No.11070436]

>>11070403
If FH RUDs carrying a NASA payload, then they would most likely make SpaceX do a large investigation that would take longer than a couple of months before allowing NASA payloads on FH again.

[Anonymous No.11070468]

>>11070431
the hoses plug in on the thigh, the connector is concealed and looks like a pocket

[Anonymous No.11070481]

>>11070431
you can hold your poop for seven days, especially in microgravity
peeing in a catheter sucks but is doable for seven days with replaceable bags

[Anonymous No.11070510]

>>11069064
One issue with that design is why the hell they'd put the living spaces and 'engineering compartments' close to the engines, but the fuel bubble far away. Fusion engines actually produce more neutron radiation per kg fuel mass than fission engines, so basically you want as much distance between your sensitive human occupants and your engines as possible. Literally just put the fuel bubble down next to the engines and stack everything else the same and you'd have a way more realistic design.

[Anonymous No.11070534]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGRl_-wWMD0
>my small brain cant wrap itself that they are actually in space
>also me: kicking myself for not buying that telescope, could have been looking at butts in space right now

[Anonymous No.11070535]

>>11070395
This, but shellfish also. Clams and oysters have stupid high nutrient loading per kilogram and they're piss easy to raise, all they need is oxygenated water with a decent fraction of organic waste product per liter to filter out.

[Anonymous No.11070542]

>>11070535
eating like kings or fishermen below the surface of Mars

[Anonymous No.11070541]

>>11070436
That's exactly what happened with CRS-7 though. Lead to about half a year of down-time.

[Anonymous No.11070545]

>>11070534
>wow all female space walk!!!
I literally don't give a shit, why does the mainstream care so much about dividing the sexes, I don't get it. It's just another space walk, it doesn't matter who's doing it.

[Anonymous No.11070551]

>>11070545
there are people who are butthurt about it

[Anonymous No.11070552]

>>11070510
IIRC the original design had the deuterium "bubble" just be a giant ball of frozen solid deuterium that was tapped off for fuel. So it made sense to have the fuel up front since that ball wouldn't have much structural strength, but the stuff necessary to pull fuel from the ball to the engines were strong enough to put the living quarters around resulting in the general shape of the Enzmann. Later it was found out that frozen deuterium wouldn't even be strong enough to stay together during engine firing, so it was encased in an inflatable balloon tank with a thin structural support going through the fuel. Now why not just move thanks closer to the engines after the redesign? IDK, maybe the designers wanted to keep the tank to be as lightweight as possible and relocating it to be between the living space and engines would require making it too heavy in order to be strong enough to handle being in it's new spot, and that simply making the engine thrust plate double as a radiation shield was the lighter option. Or maybe they wanted to keep the Enzmann shape, IDK.

[Anonymous No.11070563]

>>11070431
It's said to have a single hose connection, Idunno the port might be covered by some patch or it's not actually been added to a final suit or something like that, but the suit is at least said to include all the same fundamentals like coolant, air, etc. Honestly it's a bit too Iphone for my aesthetic taste, and if I were designing a flight suit I'd want to actually add in some EVA capabilities. I'd make a modern flightsuit a mechanical counterpressure suit like the MIT version with specific difficult to reach spots able to be pressurized at like half a bar. The same layer would contain all of the liquid cooling elements and at least piss bags just in case. Overtop of that would go a form fitting single piece suit made up of a few layers of para-aramid fiber interwoven or layered with boron fiber, this can be made to help apply pressure since certain kinds of BF can be manufactured to be highly elastic. The final layer would be a coating of insulation to protect against rapid heating in direct sun. The chest and waist would have clasps for the attachment of a rigid breastplate which would act as the attachment point for a stripped down PLSS with maybe two or three hours of air recycling capacity, it would plug into the suit with a clasp-type umbilical like that often seen on capsules to keep hoses out of the way. The helmet would have a faceplate more like a modern fighter jet helmet with a very large bubble visor to give a wide field of view. The neck of the suit would be semi-rigid and the attachment ring of the helmet would conform to the general shape of the neck and jaw, with a redundant airtight zipper. A heavy almost corset like utility belt would also aid in keeping the suit snug and providing plenty of attachments for tools. Boots would be rigid with seams for articulation of the ankle and magnetized. Gloves would have magnetic strips on the sides of the hands, out of the way of fingers but still useful for anchoring oneself.

[Anonymous No.11070583]

>>11070563
Oh yeah, this is what I meant by by a clasp or latch style umbilical for hoses. Like Orion's CS/SM umbilicus.

[Anonymous No.11070602]

>>11070346
For real? They aren't even considering algae bags/tubes with shrimp/other crustaceans on the surface? Not even fucking fish as part of a recycling hydroponic setup? Are they retarded or just trying to propagate the eat bugs propaganda?

[Anonymous No.11070616]

>>11070602
The latter, but that makes them a bit of the former as well. Eat bugs shitters should lead by example, they very noticeably don't. Just like all the fucking "muh you're going to destroy the coasts in two weeks, in one picosecond the poles will be incinerated and oceans will rise by ten thousand feet in one planck time!" who are buying up beach houses and mini-mansions on the coasts almost like they don't believe their own shit and convincing people to vacate coasts just frees up realestate for them.

[Anonymous No.11070662]

>>11070545
Societies that don't do this divide and conquer bullshit are going to surpass those that do, at some point.

[Anonymous No.11070670]

>>11070346
Fucking grow shellfish and other simple mollusks, they're piss easy to raise and are very nutritious. Better food could be imported later. I don't need any numales on mars.

[Anonymous No.11070674]

>>11068353
Interesting detail:
All of Kepler’s satellites to date have been built by ÅAC Clyde, a company based in Glasgow, Scotland that specializes in CubeSat and SmallSat production.

[Anonymous No.11070679]

>>11070545
This. We don't revere Buzz Aldrin for being a man, we revere him for being one of the first people to set foot on a new celestial body.

[Anonymous No.11070685]

>>11069057
>elons fw he ended up being right as he has to show the fact that they're already fucking up the population with their D&C tactics

[Anonymous No.11070702]

>>11070431
God, can you fucking imagine how horrible it'd be to have to sit in your own shit and piss for a week because taking off your suit to use Orion's bathroom would kill you?
Imagine being on the recovery team for that crew. Not fun.

[Anonymous No.11070704]

>>11070702
It would be less horrible than dying, which is kinda the point.

[Anonymous No.11070705]

>>11070702
IIRC something like that happened with a Soyuz mission where they jettisoned the orbital module before performing the reentry burn. Unfortunately the burn messed up and the crew in space for a week or so until their orbit decayed. The toilet was in the orbital module.

[Anonymous No.11070709]

>>11070705
>the crew in WAS LEFT IN space for a week

[Anonymous No.11070752]

>>11070705
Yeah, but they could've at least used baggies or something. They wouldn't be stuck in their suits for all that time.

[Anonymous No.11070781]

>>11069926
But isn't the IFA done at max q, which is half way through the first stage?

[Anonymous No.11070793]

>>11070670
see >>11070535

[Anonymous No.11070823]

>>11070781
Yes, but flight conditions need to be simulated. The semi-full booster will be destroyed after separation.

[Anonymous No.11070839]

>>11070823
both the first and second stages will be destroyed
I think the second stage is going to be stripped of everything they can get away with (which is mostly just the engine I think)

[Anonymous No.11070845]

>>11070823
Is there a reason not to use ballast instead of fuel? Too expensive to modify the booster?

[Anonymous No.11070853]

>>11070845
fuel is ballast

[Anonymous No.11070856]

>>11068469
Magnets.

[Anonymous No.11070858]

>>11070856
why didn't you say so!

[Anonymous No.11070861]

>>11068523
>Musk took one puff and didn't even inhale
How fucking stupid do you have yo be to puff but not inhale?

[Anonymous No.11070867]

Ooof, new planetary protection guidelines are out! High priority astrobiology areas and Mars special regions are ROBOT ONLY! Humans are OK!, but they must stay in HUMAN ZONES! Human landing sites must be assessed by robots first. Special regions require special contamination control. Special regions include Mars subsurface below 5 meters, subsurface cavities, and groundwater are special regions until demonstrated otherwise. NO DIGGING BELOW 5 METERS, LAVA TUBING, OR DRINKING THE WATER!

SpaceX proposed landing sites for starship are not Mars special regions, however, the don't dig below 5 meters requirement will probably change their ISRU plans. All their landing sites are located on top of buried glaciers. The best way to extract a lot of water from said glaciers currently is with a rodwell, or heater and pump on string lowered into a hole that makes a pool of water. See more about ice mining here:
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/mars_ice_drilling_assessment_v6_for_public_release.pdf
Gonna be hard to make a rodwell that only goes 4 meters deep into ice. I say 4 meters, because top 1 meter's probably just dirt. But this could change. If SpaceX lands some ground penetrating radar rovers and takes some core samples with something like the sterile drill we used on lake vostok and show that all they've got is -80 C ice no water, they're good to go. And that's useful to do anyway before they build a serious ice mine. Although, they might be able to start ice mining right away if they go NUCLEAR. Kilopower reactors have been considered for drilling into europa by melting it and it appears they don't need to be modified much to do so. Yes this is something of a concern because the reactor is so small, the surrounding environment can fuck with the neutron transport. From a planetary protection standpoint I don't think there's anything better than a nuclear drill. I mean fuck the damn thing's surrounded by an aura of DEATH.

[Anonymous No.11070868]

>>11068860
Cool... who do you trust with the trigger?

[Anonymous No.11070878]

>>11069356
Pedo gtfo

[Anonymous No.11070893]

>>11069560

I got kinda a fetish thing going here...

[Anonymous No.11070898]

>>11068148
Literal non issue, all you need is some foam and an exacto knife. If I can do it by hand for the hip padding on my animu jirl costume, I'm sure NASA won't have a problem

[Anonymous No.11070950]

>>11070893
your image shows an EVA suit
the ones pictured above are IVA suits, also known as flight suits, also known as launch/entry suits

[Anonymous No.11071067]

Space Walk streams are so boring.

[Anonymous No.11071113]

God damn, are NASA sympathizers even human? I don't understand how they can do the mental gymnastics needed to constantly defend them.

It's been 60 years of space suit design since the Apollo/Skylab suits and there has been no great advancement in them, hell, some of the design could be considered a regression like having only one size suit to 'save money', but suits being so expensive in the first place is directly the fault of NASA. It's around $12,000,000 for a flight-rated NASA space suit. In comparison, Apollo suits were only around $670,000 in today's dollar despite using some of the most expensive materials around at the time and having 20 plus layers that were all hand made. Good innovation at NASA is dead. They can't move forward with new designs like the MIT Biosuit because of their crippling safety culture which favors using outdated technology over innovating something that could be more dangerous at first but safer long term.

[Anonymous No.11071132]

>>11071113
(continued)
MIT professor on Biosuit safety:
"The skintight suit would allow for a degree of mobility impossible in a gas-filled suit. It also would be potentially safer. While an abrasion or micrometeor puncture in a traditional suit would threaten sudden decompression puncturing the balloon and causing a major emergency and immediate termination of the EVA—a small breach in the BioSuit could be readily repaired with a kind of high-tech Ace bandage to cover a small tear."

[Anonymous No.11071139]

>>11071113
Bizarre, because outdated technology could be significantly more unsafe than something innovative. Mechanical counterpressure suits are fundamentally safer, even if they were to suffer a tear or micrometeorite puncture they would retain their integrity at least in terms of pressure, you wouldn't begin venting your suit air to space unless your helmet gets pierced. Because counterpressure suits are slimmer too you can have a thicker outer layer of puncture and radiation shielding without sacrificing the mobility of your limbs. You are also made safer by being better able to use your hands, something which balloon gloves notoriously encumber. As demonstrated during the Apollo landings too, fully inflating suits are quite difficult to walk steadily inside and are prone to falls and even cause difficulty when trying to stand, a suit which allows you to walk naturally won't make you less awkward in low-g but at least will make it easier to for astronauts to find their footing and avoid falling. In long exploration missions this might save lives, a fall down a steep crater or facefirst onto a rock could compromise a suit and kill the wearer.

[Anonymous No.11071144]

>>11071132
A micrometeor puncture on a skinsuit implies a micrometeor puncture of the astronaut.

[Anonymous No.11071157]

>>11071113
TBF its hard to be innovative when you're hamstrung by the government.
>starts new project
>"I don't think this project is worthwhile, I'm going to cut the budget."
>project falls behind due to lack of funding
>"See? I told you that this project isn't good. More of it's funding should be cut to save money."

Or even "better"
>"I want this new project."
>project starts
>gets mostly done
>new administration rolls over
>"That project is associated with my rival so I hate this project. Cancel it now! I want it replaced my own new project."

[Anonymous No.11071159]

>>11071144
Not really different from a balloon suit, it's still basically in the shape of the astronaut, the only difference is that in one you're injured but can slap patches onto the holes and get back inside for treatment. In the other scenario you're injured and also you're going to become hypoxic quickly and you can barely move your arms enough to touch your own shoulders, much less apply a patch to the opposite side of your suit.

[Anonymous No.11071182]

>>11071157
None of this has to with spacesuit development which has been constant throughout the years. Skintight suits are a meme which is why nobody is seriously investing in them.

[Anonymous No.11071197]

>>11071182
>Skintight suits are a meme which is why nobody is seriously investing in them.
Explain specifically why you think that is the case or why creating a suit that puts 4.3 psi or greater pressure on the body is infeasible despite MIT stating that they were nearly there with the Biosuit and could complete it with a small team of a dozen people.

[Anonymous No.11071213]

>TFW no mechanical counterpressure suit wearing QT GF to explore space with.
It hurts, oh God, it hurts.

[Anonymous No.11071227]

Its been 24 hours and I have yet to find 34 of that girl/suit.

You disappoint me in your old age 4chin

[Anonymous No.11071230]

>bubble suits
>do not show boobies
>skin suits
>patrician boob display
>could even be made transparent

[Anonymous No.11071238]

>>11071197
> “Newman's proposed BioSuit designs use elastic and polymers for stretch and nickel-titanium coils that pressurize the suit when heated. The big breakthrough, she explained at an event in Washington, D.C., is nucleated boron minitubes spun into thread and sewn into these stretchy suits – effectively protecting the human body from space radiation.”

Sounds like an expensive meme that will never be mass produced, just like most University projects.

[Anonymous No.11071246]

>>11066656
The entire suit probably inflates from that band. You can probably press a button and it will suck the entire suit into the band and you wear it like a belt. I mean, that's what I'd make if I had billions of dollars to design a space suit.

[Anonymous No.11071252]

>>11067475
>commonly used phrase
>not a meme
Do you even know what a meme is?

[Anonymous No.11071261]

>>11071238
Your right my dude, nobody could ever create boron fiber, that stuff's impossible to manufacture.

[Anonymous No.11071262]

>>11071238
What? You didn't defend your point at all, you just doubled down on calling it a meme. The whole MIT team that was working on this and creation of the Biosuit was likely cheaper than a single 12 Million dollar NASA suit, not including the hundreds of million just for development.

[Anonymous No.11071264]

>>11071144
just a scratch

[Anonymous No.11071267]

>>11071213
look at how fucking done that chick in the mechanical counterpressure suit is

[Anonymous No.11071268]

>>11071252
Ah shit, I find this webm deeply unsettling, like the videos of bridges shaking apart.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XggxeuFDaDU

[Anonymous No.11071270]

>>11070346
>not using aquaponics
Fuck insects. Then you can raise anything aquatic easily.

[Anonymous No.11071274]

>>11071227
This isn't 4chan, tourist.

[Anonymous No.11071278]

>>11071267
That just makes her even more attractive. I need a whole folder of images of girls in tight space suits looking annoyed.

[Anonymous No.11071282]

>>11071278
Pictured JJJ reading this

[Anonymous No.11071283]

>>11071274
he didn't say "4chan" he said "4chin" which is objectively correct
>>11071278
yeah I wish she would look that way at me

[Anonymous No.11071287]

*crinkling intensifies*

[Anonymous No.11071291]

>>11071287
sorry anon, no iphones allowed

[Anonymous No.11071302]

>>11071283
>4chinnel

[Anonymous No.11071310]

>>11070867
Fuck the guidelines once you're there, what are they gonna do arrest you?

[Anonymous No.11071312]

>>11071310
they could withhold your food

[Anonymous No.11071315]

>>11071312
>NASA starving astronauts out of spite
Like the other anon said, bring shrimp and shit to raise. Fuck em.

[Anonymous No.11071327]

You can use fish, crayfish, shrimps, clams/muscles, whatever. At the same time you grow veggies.

[Anonymous No.11071333]

>>11071310
>>11071315
Mega-based, and free Marspilled. Fuck NASA, fuck the government, and most importantly, FUCK EARTHERS.

[Anonymous No.11071337]

>>11068860
You wouldn’t be “vaporising” anything. Just ablating millions of tiny pieces off of space junk, making it millions of times more dangerous.

[Anonymous No.11071347]

>>11071310
>knock knock
>"SPACE FORCE! OPEN UP!"
>space marines blast through the hull

[Anonymous No.11071348]

>>11071310
Uh, yes. Or just wait for you to die within a few days without big gov support.

[Anonymous No.11071350]

>>11071310

[Anonymous No.11071351]

>>11071213
eugh we need skinsuits to really get people invested in space travel, according to my man Corporal Ray Person all of the worlds problems are due to lack of pussy and by that logic if we get fine babes up in space I bet funding would quintuple if not more.

[Anonymous No.11071353]

>>11071274
nobody fucking cares, except apparently you, because you repost the same thing with the same filename dozens of times across multiple boards, you're basically barneyfag

[Anonymous No.11071354]

>>11071287
>guy on a cherrypicker with an umbrella building a starship

[Anonymous No.11071358]

>>11071348
>no roads
>no taxes
[horny ayn rand noises]

[Anonymous No.11071371]

>>11071348
>Oy vey, you better not contaminate the bacteria or we'll starve you to death.

[Anonymous No.11071388]

>>11071351
Hell yes. Expanding the attractive women in space infrastructure should be our number one priority.

[Anonymous No.11071398]

>You versus the woman Chad tells you not to worry about.

[Anonymous No.11071434]

Sorry to interrupt your delusions about memetight suits and misguided libertarian space fantasies, but an important real world announcement has been made:
http://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/10/18/1932085/0/en/Aerojet-Rocketdyne-and-Firefly-Aerospace-to-Provide-Flexible-Access-to-Space.html

>“This collaboration will leverage Firefly’s new family of launch vehicles and in-space services with Aerojet Rocketdyne’s experience in propulsion development, additive manufacturing and mission assurance for commercial, national security and exploration missions.”

>“Firefly is committed to flying Beta, our medium class launch vehicle. Aerojet Rocketdyne’s AR1 engine, which incorporates the latest advances in propulsion technology, materials science and manufacturing techniques, is incredibly well suited to power Beta given its cost-effective, high performance capabilities. By cooperating on this development, we are accelerating our time to market and providing our customers with high confidence in Beta’s schedule, performance and reliability.”

Somebody has bought the AR-1!

[Anonymous No.11071448]

>>11071434
>No benchmarks

[Anonymous No.11071457]

Trump talking to the astronauts on their spacewalk was incredibly cringe

[Anonymous No.11071467]

>>11071457
>They start interrupting each other like my co-workers on a conference call
>Trump doesn't know there is a time delay
>"I wouldn't want to be doing what you are"
I had to mute when they replayed it.

[Anonymous No.11071474]

>>11071457
>"That whole program was dead when I took it over, when we came into office," Trump said. "It's been totally reinvigorated I think to a level that it's never been at."

>"It's been totally reinvigorated I think to a level that it's never been at."


Even reading from a fucking script he can't sound intelligent.

[Anonymous No.11071483]

>>11070545
let the idiots have their tokens and participation trophies
There is literally no point in fighting this.

[Anonymous No.11071499]

>>11071434
>AR1 engine
Why didn't ULA want it for Vulcan? It would be great for jobs in Cuntsville, Alabama. Furthermore, how would it look in a tight fitting space suit? Asking for a friend, of course.

[Anonymous No.11071504]

How long will it be before I can sell my house, pack as much hydroponic equipment as my ticket weight allowance gives me, and set sail for Mars, with the goal of being that world's first marijuana growop?

Marsijuana

[Anonymous No.11071523]

>>11071504
You'd have to compete with Marsimoto

[Anonymous No.11071538]

>>11071499
>Why didn't ULA want it for Vulcan? It would be great for jobs in Cuntsville, Alabama.

Because it’s further behind in development than BE-4, likely due to it’s more challenging design using kerosene and two combustion chambers. Also, BE-4 is being built in Blue’s new Huntsville factory...

[Anonymous No.11071551]

>>11069417

>not modeling her directly on Sailor Jupiter

YHOJ

[Anonymous No.11071560]

>>11071434
AJRD bankruptcy countdown time

gotta buy some puts on Monday

[Anonymous No.11071593]

>>11071538
Aerojet was going to build the AR1 there as well.
https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2017/04/aerojet-rocketdyne_bringing_80.html

[Anonymous No.11071600]

>>11071398
virgin vs chad

[Anonymous No.11071604]

>>11071560
I hope you enjoy going bankrupt, Aerojet are an incredibly profitable company. They’ve got contracts with ULA and Northrop for RL-10s, DARPA for AR-22 and OpFires, NASA for SLS RS-25s and RL-10s + probe propulsion, hundreds of commercial satellite builders for propulsion and dozens of missile propulsion contracts with the DoD.

[Anonymous No.11071613]

>>11069560

I actually like the Boeing suit and its fabric helmet and sneakers.

[Anonymous No.11071615]

>>11071593
Yes, whoever won the Vulcan competition would build the plant to be close to ULA’s factory in Decatur.

[Anonymous No.11071636]

>>11069714
They look like spaceballs props

[Anonymous No.11071669]

>>11071613
I unironically want to cop the NASA shoes

[Anonymous No.11071688]

>>11071504
Fuck you I'm gonna get there before you and set up the world's first mars grow op.

[Anonymous No.11071730]

>>11071688
>>11071523
>gee musk, why does your mars colony have THREE pot shops?

[Anonymous No.11071752]

>>11071730
I will sell special surface suit attachments that have a container of weed. A silicon pipe runs up into the helmet, when you want a hit you grab the pipe with your teeth, the box then heats the weed up, vaporises some and you take a hit. You exhale into the tube and it goes into a small bladder which vents into the Martian atmosphere when you finish exhaling. Brb filing my patent.

[Anonymous No.11071837]

>>11071752
>This is control to anon
>Can you confirm if you have finished cleaning the dust off panel row 1-D?
>Uh..... The what?

[Anonymous No.11071929]

>>11070845
It's more expensive to run a hose up to the 2nd stage tanks to fill them with water than to just pump them full of the usual suspects

[Anonymous No.11071944]

>>11071483
it's just so tiresome

[Anonymous No.11071964]

>>11070545
it's so patronizing it's funny
>wow women can do spacewalks without male supervision now!

[Anonymous No.11072095]

Is this pressure regulator good to use with nos? It's hard to find nos specific regulators.
https://www.mcmaster.com/8166t21-8166T13

[Anonymous No.11072117]

>>11072095
Oops, pasted the wrong one. Both are functionally the same though.
https://www.mcmaster.com/8166t21-8166T14

[Anonymous No.11072714]

the chad sls

[Anonymous No.11072923]

>>11072117
It's most likely fine but almost certainly overkill depending on what output pressure you need.
You might want to check some place like summit racing for that.

[Anonymous No.11072992]

>>11071964
Has a woman ever done something first as a human being and not as a woman?

[Anonymous No.11073010]

>>11072992
die of radiation?

[Anonymous No.11073027]

>>11072992
First and only crime committed from space was a woman

[Anonymous No.11073034]

>>11073027
oh right that happened

[Anonymous No.11073070]

Can someone bake new bread? My IP range is banned from baking.

[Anonymous No.11073088]

>>11073070
If you give me an image to post with it and a thread edition, I'll make it. Otherwise I just want to make fun of the gay NASA suits again.

[Anonymous No.11073096]

NEW THREAD:
>>11073093

>>11073093

>>11073093

>>11073093

>>11073093

>>11073088
Never mind. I won't be as obnoxious this time.