/sfg/ Spaceflight General

File: 180 KB, 1200x800, 1575525460276.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

/sfg/ Spaceflight General Anonymous Thu Dec 5 04:32:20 2019 No.11201067 [Reply] [Original]

SLC-41 edition

Previous Thread:
>>11195851

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 04:41:45 2019 No.11201078 File: 312 KB, 2500x1406, 1575538858175.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11201067 Sorry for skipping SLC-40 edition, but the pic of the full Starliner stack was too good to pass up.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 04:49:14 2019 No.11201085

>>11201067
>48-hour delay will allow engineers to address a "purge air supply" issue on the Atlas V rocket built for the mission
>ULA and Boeing decided to push the launch back to replace the duct and finish processing the rocket for launch
Can they realistically do this in 48 hours? Take into consideration that this is ULA and Boeing we are talking about..

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 04:50:19 2019 No.11201086 >>11201085 ULA's got the best on-time launch performance in the industry.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 05:03:26 2019 No.11201103

>>11201085
Dude, they mentioned they had already fixed the issue when they announced the slip. You can also tell they’ve fixed the issue because the stack has since been rolled out to the pad for the WDR. It was just a relatively small problem with the GSE that caused this delay (which is why there was only a two day slip) and not something to do with the spacecraft or booster themselves, their “perfectly healthy”.

>“During pre-launch processing of the Atlas 5, there was an issue with the rocket’s purge air supply duct,” ULA said in a statement Tuesday. “Additional time was needed for the ULA and Boeing teams to complete an analysis of the issue, replace the duct and complete processing ahead of launch.”

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 05:20:59 2019 No.11201117 >>11201067 Why doesn’t the SRB have a nose cone?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 05:28:59 2019 No.11201127 ---REDACTED-- your local Boeing employee

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 05:34:53 2019 No.11201135 >>11201117 Do prevent the launch director getting any funny ideas during the WDR...

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 05:41:44 2019 No.11201141 >>11201117 To prevent the launch director getting any funny ideas during the WDR...

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 06:53:09 2019 No.11201239 >>11201067 Probably funniest thing about this is Russia killing its own space industry by providing RD-180 engines for Atlas V.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 07:05:52 2019 No.11201256 >>11201239 I mean Russia killed it’s own space industry in 2014 by invading Crimea. If that hadn’t happened nobody would care about ULA using the RD-180, or at least not enough to force them to switch to American first-stage engines.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 07:24:47 2019 No.11201287 File: 203 KB, 500x458, QwndNQv.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Is Robert's Road at Cape Canaveral getting built soon? Is Coco being scrapped before RR?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 07:39:28 2019 No.11201309 Finally a real 100% American rocket flying Americans from American soil.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 07:45:10 2019 No.11201320 >>11201309 >>First stage – Atlas CCB >>Engines 1 RD-180 maga am I right ?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 07:51:29 2019 No.11201326 >>11201256 that's where they take their vacations, and son of biden was going to get it if they didn't take it first. necessary sacrifice

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 07:59:07 2019 No.11201334 >>11201320 There’s nothing more American than using another countries’ rocket technology to get ahead. For example, the Redstone rocket that launched the first American into space was essentially just an upgraded V-2.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 08:52:44 2019 No.11201398 >>11201256 I think that worst thing about that Russia still was able to make millions simply because people in Congress was not able to put their shit together for once.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 09:46:36 2019 No.11201473
File: 185 KB, 1920x1080, 527E188B-4725-445C-95D8-2F41FBC1EA32.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>11201067
It’s gonna be really weird when they transition to flying Starliner on Vulcan, considering it’ll start off launching on a booster that’s way too skinny and end up flying on a booster that’s wider than itself. Vulcan could theoretically launch Orion to LEO, considering it’s the same diameter as the Delta 4 and is designed to be human-rated unlike the latter.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 10:37:17 2019 No.11201569

>>11201256
their hand was forced after the coup in ukraine. What were they supposed to do? Give up sevastopol and their entire black sea fleet?
Also no longer being able to sell a handful of engines or soyuz tickets in the future is a drop in the ocean compared to the funding required to keep their space program going. The sanctions did way more in that regard but even without those they wouldn't exactly be in a position to throw money at their space program. The soviet/russian space program died in 1990.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 10:53:45 2019 No.11201618 >ISS >no in-situ resource utilization Why is an intelligent and capable agency like JAXA funding this, again

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 10:56:44 2019 No.11201630 >>11201618 Because spaceflight has been so screwed over for so long that the only place worthwhile to do anything is the ISS.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 11:07:41 2019 No.11201664

>>11201618
They were also the ones proposing the preposterous idea to add spin gravity module to test out various unimportant things nobody in the serious space community cares about. Luckily Reason and Science prevailed and left that research for the distant future. And, by mockery of fate, there's reasonable chance private boots on the ground will do it on the field anyway.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 12:04:44 2019 No.11201792 File: 394 KB, 2048x1152, D988LJNX4AYbVjQ.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Can we take a moment to talk about how beautiful these grid fins are?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 12:06:45 2019 No.11201801 >>11201792 it makes me sad that Elon has commented that Super Heavy will be using steel grid fins welded together by mexicans in a field such a huge titanium casting, it's beautiful

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 12:16:51 2019 No.11201836 CRS-19 launch in 13 minutes. The thread is here: >>11198459 >>11198459 >>11198459

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 12:43:44 2019 No.11201938 In flight abort now net feburary. Yikes

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 12:47:19 2019 No.11201950 >>11201938 Loren Gush is saying someone (obviously from NASA or SpaceX) told her it isn’t actually scheduled for February (the host misspoke?) and L2 is saying it’s January. So imma stick with January.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 14:35:21 2019 No.11202197 BREAKING NEWS The return to the moon by 2024 is cancelled https://spacenews.com/new-nasa-human-spaceflight-leader-calls-sls-mandatory-for-return-to-the-moon/

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 14:37:23 2019 No.11202206 File: 437 KB, 1920x1280, 3FE794D4-1BF1-4323-8E30-F5176F320FE1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11202197 Lol, seethe harder. What other rocket are you gonna use then?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 14:47:12 2019 No.11202235 >>11202197 >>11202206 Remember when people actually thought Jim Bridenstine was a closet SLS opponent?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 14:53:48 2019 No.11202251 >>11202235 no anon, you don't understand, he's saying those things because he has to

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:00:11 2019 No.11202264

>>11202206
How much will it cost?

>over $5 billion per launch
NOOOO STOP AMMORTIZING R/D

>over $3 billion per launch
NOOOO STOP COUNTING LAUNCH FACILITIES NEEDED FOR SLS

>over $2 billion per launch
NOOOO STOP COUNTING PAY TO WORKERS

>$900 million
That's right. It will only cost $500 million, so give us $50 billion to launch 10 SLS.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:00:15 2019 No.11202265 >>11202206 The world will be in shock and awe once the mighty sls takes flight.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:00:25 2019 No.11202266 >>11202197 >"It's time to deliver."

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:00:31 2019 No.11202267 >>11202197 At some point shit is going to get postponed long enough that Elon is just going to throw Starships at the moon and Mars just for the lulz.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:02:30 2019 No.11202270 >>11202206 dropping RS-25s in the ocean is a fucking travesty

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:04:35 2019 No.11202274 >>11202267 k

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:05:26 2019 No.11202275 >>11202264 Psst hey kid. I like your style, you've got real american fire in you. Can you make it look cheaper than falcon 9?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:05:30 2019 No.11202276 >>11202267 >Elon is just going to throw Starships at the moon and Mars just for the lulz. Elon should focus on hiring some decent welders first

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:05:36 2019 No.11202277 >>11202264 nice fake math

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:09:13 2019 No.11202282

>>11202276
Its an organizational problem, not a welder problem. Failure of a product reflects a failure of a company, and not the lowest common workers. Thus its a problem for SpaceX/Elon to find a better solution. Changing welders won't solve it. Changing welding systems might.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:10:06 2019 No.11202283 >>11202276 but anon, wasting a year on a tank that blows up (which is BASIC engineering) is progress! SLS BTFO!

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:13:56 2019 No.11202296 >>11202283 Agreed. SpaceX should have spent 10 years and spent $100 billion on r/d before ever moving to validate their vehicle. What are they DOING? Amateurs.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:15:22 2019 No.11202302 >>11202296 It's going to take 3 years, 400000 computing hours, $10B, and 13 teams of engineers just to find the right type of alloy to use.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:16:48 2019 No.11202305 >>11202296 >there's literally no middle ground between not planning anything and planning literally everything

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:18:54 2019 No.11202311

>>11202302
NASA estimates cost of initial Falcon 9(no reusable aspect) development to be $4 billion. SLS R/D is well over $20 billion and that's using decades of R/D knowledge base. Starship that will do reusable and 100 ton should cost well over $100 billion and take more than a decade to design.

If SpaceX does it in $10billion, Elon Musk is GOD.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:23:44 2019 No.11202324

>>11202305
risking the failure of an early, cheap prototype constructed using substandard welding procedures and almost no inspection of welds while the infrastructure to produce future prototypes and launch vehicles according to higher standards is put in place is not no planning.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:24:42 2019 No.11202325 >>11202305 I know right? SpaceX is stupid. Why are they not planning anything?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:26:23 2019 No.11202331 >>11202324 And it's fucking easy as shit to make pressurized tanks not blow up. It is basic engineering.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:28:31 2019 No.11202335

>>11202331
You're right, the primary thing Elon learned was not to trust random contractors to weld a pressure vessel (assuming it was a weld that failed at normal pressures and not, as rumored, a relief valve that failed at well above design pressures)

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:29:41 2019 No.11202339

>>11202331
It absolutely is, I argued the same when it happened. The thing isn't that its hard to do so but that there's no reason to put much effort into the rigging required to do so just for a prototype. They probably thought something along the lines of
>eh, it just needs to withstand 3 bar, chances are mexican welders on telescope lifts can do that without xray/ultrasonic weld inspection
The robotic welders and inspection systems that will be used for the real starship are not ready, and they thought they could use the time until they were to crank out a few prototypes to test shit. Turns out that gamble failed.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:30:32 2019 No.11202341 >>11202335 If it was so shoddily built that kinda undermines the narrative that this was ever actually an "orbital prototype" and not just a mock-up or PR piece.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:31:25 2019 No.11202343 >>11202282 they need better QA

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:31:35 2019 No.11202344 >>11202331 Go work for SpaceX then instead of spending all your time making stupid Internet posts and pretending to be an armchair rocket scientist.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:33:15 2019 No.11202348 >>11202344 I don't need to be a rocket scientist to know how pressure vessels work.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:35:27 2019 No.11202353 >>11202341 It probably cost less than the Froyo program though, so it was worth a shot.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:36:48 2019 No.11202360

>>11202348
If you think it's simple to build a huge pressure vessel in the middle of a field over a few months without any issues, go show SpaceX how it's done or do anything besides talk about subjects you are not qualified in. I bet you're not even an engineer.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:38:44 2019 No.11202372 >>11202360 I bet he's not even employed.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:39:40 2019 No.11202376 >>11202311 it's basically just shuttle but good instead of bad

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:40:13 2019 No.11202378 >>11202348 Building everyone for space is easy. Doing it fast and cheap is not easy.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:42:24 2019 No.11202387 >>11202376 SLS is literally shuttle, but gimped and cost same or more.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:43:25 2019 No.11202390 >>11202270 First ever reusable rocket engines will be dropped into the ocean on expendable rocket stage. Ironic.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:52:47 2019 No.11202417

>>11202360
you're telling me that a task achieved by steam trains in the 1800s can't be replicated by an aerospace company in the 2000s because it's "too hard"
you seem to think that pressure vessels are some mythical holy construct and not centuries-old technology
I'm sorry the implication that SpaceX fucked up triggers you so much

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 15:55:38 2019 No.11202424 >>11202387 No, SLS is the beast that consumed shuttle

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 16:05:12 2019 No.11202439

>>11202417
It's not "too hard", it's complicated to get right under their conditions and time frame, which should be obvious to everyone remotely intelligent. You seem to think you know more about building pressure vessels than people who are experts in their field and work for the number one aerospace company in the world when you're not even qualified to speak about how to assemble a shed, let alone how to build a rocket. It isn't even The Dunning-Kruger effect, you're just absolutely retarded and have no idea what you are talking about yet insist on LARPing.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 16:33:47 2019 No.11202500

>>11202439
lol you're really mad
I'm not even trolling. It's legitimately very easy to build a pressure vessel. The principles are well-understood and have been for over a hundred years.
You seem to take any criticism of their methods as a personal attack.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 16:35:43 2019 No.11202510 >>11201792 I want to own one of them to place in my house.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 16:46:47 2019 No.11202536

>>11202500
The fault of the pressure vessel likely isn't due to violation principle but rather an unlikely event like sensor issue or welding issue leading to over-pressurization. Whatever the case, its not due to principle violation issues but rather human errors. SpaceX isn't playing GOD by violating physics.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 16:49:53 2019 No.11202543

>>11202500
I'm not angry, I'm mildly annoyed by your shit posting and constant stupidity. It's cancerous to people here that actually want to talk about spaceflight without having to deal with people that shouldn't be here.
> It's legitimately very easy to build a pressure vessel
It's not legitimately easy under those conditions, you fucking idiot, otherwise they wouldn't have failed. What experience do you have that supports your assertion? Do you work in the aerospace industry? Have you ever welded stainless steel outside while bouncing around 100 feet in the air? Hell, have you done any metal work or engineering? You obviously haven't, you're some worthless teenager literally making things up and you get offended when anyone calls you out.

No rational adult would look at a company at SpaceX and believe they could do a better job and their work is trivial.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 16:59:39 2019 No.11202570

>>11202536
See, I agree to an extent. I think their engineers designed a perfectly fine pressure vessel (because they're not blithering idiots) and that the construction crew fucked it up.
The PROBLEM is that they repeatedly claimed mk1 was going to space, yet they evidently did not do even basic QC on it. That's incredibly dumb if they were actually serious about sending it to space, and the whole thing was incredibly skeevy if they weren't.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:02:13 2019 No.11202575 >>11202543 >claims to not be mad >immediately resorts to insults and personal attacks he's so buttmad someone would dare criticize his favorite company k

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:05:16 2019 No.11202578 >>11202206 Been wondering for quite a while now. What's FOD and how do you stop it?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:06:40 2019 No.11202582 >>11202570 they really should have x-rayed or at least inspected all of those welds

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:07:33 2019 No.11202584 >>11202570 I mean 20km isn’t space but your point is still valid, it was originally supposed to fly until the Mexican weld-...ahem...I mean, construction team fucked it up.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:08:47 2019 No.11202586

>>11202578
Foreign Object damage. Basically, anything that can get somewhere it's not supposed to be and cause problems. In aerospace even a scratch can compromise a critical part, to say nothing of turbomachinery that really really does not like operating out of its design limits or ingesting anything that isn't what it is designed to.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:09:25 2019 No.11202589

>>11202578
Foreign Object Debris: foreign object debris (FOD) is any article or substance, alien to an aircraft or system, which could potentially cause damage. Internal FOD hazards include items left in the cockpit that interfere with flight safety by getting tangled in control cables, jam moving parts or short-out electrical connections.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:10:38 2019 No.11202592 >>11202578 To put it simply: You don't want loose items inside a rocket accelerating at ridiculous rates.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:12:56 2019 No.11202597

>>11202575
You haven't made a serious argument, you just keep asserting that it should have been easy for SpaceX to build a pressure vessel in those conditions despite the fact that it wasn't, of course I'm mocking you for it. What do you expect? You don't have any supporting evidence. You don't have any experience related to the subject. You likely cannot even complete basic engineering tasks. Why should I take you seriously?
>criticize his favorite company
SpaceX isn't my favorite company. I'm not defending them because their SpaceX, I'm defending basic common sense. I detest Boeing but I wouldn't pretend I could get SLS tank built in my backyard that would be able to take it to space.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:13:08 2019 No.11202598 >>11202582 >mexican welding inspectors >shower everyone around with lethal doses of x-rays >inb4 reusable welding inspectors meme

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:13:29 2019 No.11202599 >>11202592 Such incidents really put a spanner in the works for aerospace engineers...

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:14:43 2019 No.11202602 >>11202597 it was easy for them to build a pressure vessel in those conditions, we call it Starhopper the problems came when the tried to make it light

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:18:29 2019 No.11202612 >>11202592 >>11202589 >>11202586 Thanks, that makes sense. Except why do they need to sound like old commie slogans

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:24:57 2019 No.11202625

>>11202602
That wasn't easy either, Starhopper was a very impressive engineering feat. Starhopper easily could have failed and it did break if you include the other half of it that got damaged due to LMAO wind. I guess those idiots should have learned about wind damage, right? If only they hired some random likely under age high school student without any working experience or education in the subject...

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:26:46 2019 No.11202631 >>11202612 Because FOD is one of the things that you REALLY must be reminded of on a regular basis. If you dont, something WILL get where it's not supposed to be and all hell will break loose.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:37:53 2019 No.11202645 >>11202631 It's so serious that if there's CHANCE of FOD, they'll stop all work until they either find it or are absolutely sure there's none. FOD is serious business.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:39:03 2019 No.11202649 >>11202625 S E E T H I N G

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:41:30 2019 No.11202653 >>11202625 Starhopper was a water tower with engines strapped on the bottom. Not exactly an "amazing engineering feat." Hell, the avionics of Starhopper are more impressive than the vehicle they flew.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:43:17 2019 No.11202660 >>11202625 >If only they hired some random likely under age high school student without any working experience or education in the subject... i smell projection

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:44:47 2019 No.11202665 >>11202625 >If only they hired some random likely under age high school student without any working experience or education in the subject... Why would they hire you?

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:55:55 2019 No.11202700

>>11202649
>Everyone that thinks I'm an idiot must be a super angry person and they cannot possibly be stating the truth. That must be it.
>>11202653
That water tower was a rocket built fucking outside in the middle of nowhere in a record amount of time. That engine was a Raptor, arguably the best engine that ever existed and it may very well take us to Mars. I could go on, but you'll just move the goal posts anyway and downplay the achievement, using petty tactics like implying it was just a water tower. You don't seem to understand that the water tower meme wasn't supposed to be taken literally.
>>11202660
I smell samefag, but cute projecting projection.
>>11202665
I didn't state that they would hire me, but I am however infinitely more qualified than the person I responded to originally who believes they could easily build a Starship pressure tank under the same conditions.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 17:57:55 2019 No.11202705 >>11202700 >I would go on How so? It was literally a Raptor and some hasty tankage. The Raptor is a fucking modern miracle, but the rest of Starhopper was plumbing parts.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:00:37 2019 No.11202708 >>11202705 Don't bother. He's pathologically incapable of admitting SpaceX can make mistakes.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:04:04 2019 No.11202716

>>11202700
>le Raptor best engine ever
>implying that rocket engines aren't super-specialized machines optimized for different performance characteristics
lmao, okay. you're one of those guys who watches everyday astronaut and thinks that gives them an engineering license, aren't you?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:05:59 2019 No.11202722 >>11202705 >It was literally a Raptor and some hasty tankage. All the more impressive then it was able to fly and reland. Something technically highly demanding and only achieved by a small number of rockets in history.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:08:20 2019 No.11202727
File: 160 KB, 720x1158, A1A2C3D8-9DD0-4997-A53A-9FD12EF802D1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

We had a big discussion about spacesuits when the new Artemis suits were revealed a while back; we discussed American suits to death, but didn’t even touch on foreign designs. After looking at some, I’ve got to say the Indian IVA suit for their future Gaganyaan capsule looks absolutely horrendous...

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:12:17 2019 No.11202731 >>11202727 >poo in suit

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:12:22 2019 No.11202732 >>11202727 I like the contrast between the suit and the poster in the back i think that one just looks janky because it's not an actual IVA suit.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:13:19 2019 No.11202735

>>11202705
It was the first rocket ever built outside in six weeks, which is an astounding achievement, especially considering they were working with materials they had no real experience with. It was a first of its kind for aerospace manufacturing. Not to mention the relanding. Do you think that is an easy task or are you willing to lie through your teeth to save face on an anonymous image board?
>>11202708
You're not even trying to represent the truth. Of course SpaceX makes mistakes, I've never once denied that, I'm just not arrogant enough to think that I would be able to do better and that what they're doing is trivial. You however do and you constantly stated so.
>>11202716
>implying that rocket engines aren't super-specialized machines optimized for different performance characteristics
At no point did I imply that, although I see you're goal post moving as I said you would. The Raptor is a very well rounded engine and has good performance characteristics across the board, so it very well could be deserving of the title of 'king of all engines'. Do you want to get back on the subject at hand or do you want to keep ducking the point and pretending you're addressing anything?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:13:55 2019 No.11202740 File: 2.54 MB, 489x734, 3a443293f4491b9ca3580c286a057a34[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11202727 Real one looks a little better. still kinda unappealing tho

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:15:02 2019 No.11202745 >>11202732 The suit in the poster is actually ACES, the infinitely aesthetically superior suit used by Space Shuttle crews.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:17:46 2019 No.11202751 Stop giving him (you)s

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:17:55 2019 No.11202752

>>11202735
>It was the first rocket ever built outside in six weeks, which is an astounding achievement, especially considering they were working with materials they had no real experience with. It was a first of its kind for aerospace manufacturing. Not to mention the relanding. Do you think that is an easy task or are you willing to lie through your teeth to save face on an anonymous image board?
big whoop considering it was apparently made so poorly it blew up. maybe there's a reason nobody else assembles their crap outdoors in a field? you ever consider that? even SpaceX is going to be abandoning that approach for the future models. sounds to me like it wasn't a very productive way of doing things.
>At no point did I imply that, although I see you're goal post moving as I said you would. The Raptor is a very well rounded engine and has good performance characteristics across the board, so it very well could be deserving of the title of 'king of all engines'.
okay everyday estronaut
>Do you want to get back on the subject at hand or do you want to keep ducking the point and pretending you're addressing anything?
why? you've been doing the same thing. you do realize that steam engines assembled in the 1800s had pressure vessels that didn't explode, yet you conveniently refused to even acknowledge that

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:19:02 2019 No.11202754 >>11202740 POO IN SUIT

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:19:58 2019 No.11202757 >>11202745 Are you sure? It definitely looks kind of like ACES - especially the helmet area - but the torso seems off.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:23:11 2019 No.11202764 File: 398 KB, 1000x1820, 5875314_1000x.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11202727 for reference, the Orion Crew Survival Suit (OCSS)

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:26:30 2019 No.11202768 >>11202735 How much time have you given him today anon

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:27:51 2019 No.11202770 >>11202727 >>11202740 the suit in the poster and the suit that the guy in the .gif is wearing look like the same suit

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:39:22 2019 No.11202794

>>11202752
>big whoop considering it was apparently made so poorly it blew up
We cannot have a conversation when you have no idea what we are talking about and don't even understand the basics of rocketry. The Starhopper did not blow up, you're thinking of Starship. Even if outside assembly is untenable, it's a remarkable achievement in and of itself and what they do after this is completely besides the point.
> sounds to me like it wasn't a very productive way of doing thing
You know of any test flight rockets built within six weeks with a very limited budget or is this more of your 'I know more than experts at a leading spaceflight company' drivel?
>okay everyday estronaut
Okay, retard. The Raptor is just a shitty engine that isn't novel in any sense, right? You should tell the Air Force to stop partially funding it. Looks like there's another job opening for you over there as well.
>you've been doing the same thing.
No I absolutely haven't. I haven't denied that historically they have made pressure vessels, that doesn't mean it's easy to rapidly build a gigantic stainless steel shell outside and that it's easy to do so. If you actually think that and you're not just responding because you're upset that I called you an idiot while you were being retarded, go do it. Build a mockup tank, pressure test it and see how far you get. Please make sure you stand close to it while testing for accurate results.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:40:22 2019 No.11202795 >>11202794 Stop replying to him you imbecile

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:43:50 2019 No.11202803

>>11202795
Stop whining about it and just ignore the posts. It isn't even a single person, there are a half dozen people that routinely post the same shit. Some of them actually believe it and just don't know any better because the more autistic conflict adverse users never step in to correct them.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 18:49:42 2019 No.11202818 >>11202803 >Just ignore it Guess I'll just not even bother reading the threads then since they autistically spam more than half the posts sometimes.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:00:42 2019 No.11202855

>>11202818
It's either that or watch very slow moving threads that just dryly talk about the same things over and over again ad nauseam. We may have even had this conversation before. The spaceflight industry doesn't move fast enough to support anything else. A better idea would be to change the general into /space/ instead of /sfg/ which would broaden the subject and likely draw more people in.

Just for you, I'm going to stop posting for today. Have fun.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:06:44 2019 No.11202872 File: 133 KB, 456x275, my spirit is broken.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] So uh, what was on that Dragon that went up today? The lady on the stream said something about a thing for a JPX module and some new battery thing?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:07:43 2019 No.11202874 >>11202872 there were two external payloads that they talked about, a big battery and a multispectral scanner that the Japanese sent up

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:08:34 2019 No.11202878 >>11202872 Moar rats, but this time they are speshul rats so it totally invalidates decades of not sending them up with a small centrifuge to test the biggest fucking question we need to know the answer to.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:09:47 2019 No.11202882 >>11202578 Foreign Object Debris, it's also a problem on airport tarmac. That's what took down the Concorde. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_object_damage

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:11:28 2019 No.11202889 >>11202612 Because it actually happened in a plane that Boeing delivered to the USAF.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:16:13 2019 No.11202899 >>11202855 >change the general into /space/ Oh hell no, we've got enough nutters as it is.

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:22:24 2019 No.11202921

>>11202794
So Air Force funding is a measure of quality now?

For someone so eager to accuse others of LARPing as an engineer...

Anyway, I don't know where you get your over-inflated sense of knowledge from, but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and you pepper your posts with insults to try and disguise it.

I'm not going to give an engineering lecture on pressure vessels to some delusional SpaceX fanboy on 4chan who can't fucking accept that no matter how fast they built a shitty water tank in a field that exploded, it's still a fucking shitty water tank in a field that exploded. Nor am I going to dignify some idiot's statement that Raptor is "the bESt enGIne EvAR" with any response besides "ok retard."

If you're looking for lowest cost, Merlin beats it. If you're looking for thrust, F1 beats it, if you're looking for sheer technical sophistication, RS-25 beats it. Guess what? They all suck and excel in different categories. There is no single "right answer."

You're the kind of ignorant fanboy that gives the whole space fandom a bad name.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:22:33 2019 No.11202922 >>11202899 remember when some idiot called a thread spacex general and everybody collectively told him to fuck off remember when every thread with spacex in the title was inundated with shitposters

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:23:26 2019 No.11202925 >>11202795 If the idiot can't keep it in his pants, that's his problem.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 19:43:05 2019 No.11202975 >>11202922 I still remember about that dipshit who kept complaining that this general focused too much on American spaceflight, and wanted it to be renamed /usasfg/.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 20:04:53 2019 No.11203019 >>11202265 And then move on to the CHAD starship. Oh wait, that one will have already been flying by the time SLS is complete.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 20:21:52 2019 No.11203071 File: 3.47 MB, 4935x3359, 4F595931-3352-461E-9C1C-8053880F64F2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11203019 >CHAD starship

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 20:24:04 2019 No.11203077 >>11203071 >the virgin dumped to the bottom of the sea >the CHAD recycled to continue assisting the human race

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 20:42:02 2019 No.11203121 >>11202882 Why do Americans always call it 'the' Concorde? Its just Concorde. You don't say 'the 747' etc.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 20:44:52 2019 No.11203128 >>11203121 Because it was a specific one that went RUD.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 20:48:21 2019 No.11203137 >>11203128 Ah yes you're right. It's ten to two here and I can't fucking sleep.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 21:33:24 2019 No.11203272 File: 489 KB, 1265x836, wide power.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11202727 How... pathetically slim

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 21:49:12 2019 No.11203316 File: 134 KB, 800x900, 1a4693ea3d8e084e472dc26bd0109e68.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11203272

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 21:52:42 2019 No.11203329 >>11203272 large and in charge

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 22:04:35 2019 No.11203361 >>11203329 tight is clearly not right

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 22:24:27 2019 No.11203446 File: 803 KB, 1265x836, maybe you can explain why i did this but i cant.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11203361 What's tight is the span of this TINY SHIP

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 22:27:08 2019 No.11203454 >>11203272 >>11203446 They had to start pushing the idea of the 18m Starship in hopes of one day containing him

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 23:22:38 2019 No.11203608 >>11201792 >notices serial number OWC whats this

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 23:44:50 2019 No.11203638 File: 130 KB, 620x662, bolt_ig.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11202578 This is PREMIUM Roscosmos FOD! Install in rocket today! Made in GLORIOUS Soviet Union. Same model as N5 FOD!

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 23:57:07 2019 No.11203662 >>11203638 Install free of charge when you not looking

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 00:09:21 2019 No.11203678 File: 305 KB, 1200x1200, 1539561240617t.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11203638

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 00:45:38 2019 No.11203730 File: 795 KB, 1493x1114, unknown[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Some docs on the new Nuclear Thermal Propulsion program Congress funded.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 00:46:41 2019 No.11203732 File: 670 KB, 1494x1119, unknown[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11203730 Forgot link: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/rballard_ntp_update_oct2019_508.pdf

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 00:48:09 2019 No.11203738 File: 422 KB, 1493x1114, unknown[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11203732 Last slide I'm posting. See the pdf for more info.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 01:13:57 2019 No.11203790 File: 39 KB, 500x491, neat.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11203730 >>11203732 >>11203738

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 02:41:25 2019 No.11203918 Another electron launch tonight, who's watching?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 02:49:21 2019 No.11203931 >>11203918 It's nearly 3am here but I don't have to work until 5pm. When's the launch?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 02:51:07 2019 No.11203934 >>11203931 launch window is open for roughly the next hour and a half, but looking at the weather it'll probably be scrubbed.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 02:54:11 2019 No.11203937 >>11203934 Damn, I'll probably be out by then if it launches at all. What's the payload?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 03:00:23 2019 No.11203945 >>11203937 Bunch of microsats, most interesting is some Japanese one that creates artificial meteor showers.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 03:02:31 2019 No.11203950 >>11203945 stream music started

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 03:04:18 2019 No.11203952 >>11203950 stream here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK9mQdar5_w

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 03:24:14 2019 No.11203975 >>11203952 great night launch! They have a camera and downlink on the first stage for this flight, so we are going to have reentry footage as research for their own reusability program, similar to Space X.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 03:37:32 2019 No.11203993 >ending the stream before updates on how the stage did on reentry Oh well, was a pretty launch regardless.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 03:39:41 2019 No.11204001 >>11203993 https://twitter.com/Peter_J_Beck/status/1202869677308829697 >Electron made it through wall! Solid telemetry all the way to sea level with a healthy stage. A massive step for recovery!! Hype, second recoverable private rocket soon.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 03:43:02 2019 No.11204007 >>11204001 that is utterly amazing! Even SpaceX couldn't achieve that until they implemented the reentry burn and gridfins.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 03:45:19 2019 No.11204015 >>11204007 also, Soyuz Progress launch in less than an hour

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 03:48:08 2019 No.11204021 >>11204015 Goddamn, I'd love to see somebody do a visualization/timelapse of all the launches this year squeezed down to a minute or two.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 03:48:35 2019 No.11204023 >>11203952 They need a bigger font for the clock, it's barely a smudge unless you go full screen.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 04:12:47 2019 No.11204049 >>11202586 The turbopumps on the falcon 9 seem to operate fine with small cracks apparently.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 04:32:11 2019 No.11204067 >>11204007 SpaceX confirmed for garbage

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 04:51:03 2019 No.11204086 >>11202922 >remember when some idiot called a thread spacex general and everybody collectively told him to fuck off SpaceX generals were common on /sci/ like a year ago.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 05:00:40 2019 No.11204095 >>11204007 Without a re-entry burn to slow down as well, I’m surprised how robust Electron is despite being made of carbon fibre.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 05:15:42 2019 No.11204104 >>11204001 Interesting, very surprised they got telemetry all the way back to the surface. Good news but doesn't necessarily mean the first stage wasn't fucked in one of many ways.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 05:20:52 2019 No.11204111 >>11204001 Sweet, more progress on reusability is always good. I assume they still dump the batteries though? That must be a pretty big chunk of cash spent on those.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 05:23:10 2019 No.11204115

>>11204111
Well, they're second-stage stuff, so not reusable, but it also depends on the battery chemistry. It would be kind of silly to use rechargeable batteries once and jettison them, so they could use a one-time chemistry. With low self-discharge, they could keep them stored for a long time before launch.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 05:42:37 2019 No.11204143 >>11204115 Ah yes you are right they junk 2/3 partway through the second stage flight, they are LiPo batteries though, very expensive to throw into the sea.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 05:49:49 2019 No.11204150 >>11201664 >They were also the ones proposing the preposterous idea to add spin gravity module to test out various unimportant things nobody in the serious space community cares about. Why the fuck would this have been a good idea?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 06:07:31 2019 No.11204163 >>11201664 >They were also the ones proposing the preposterous idea to add spin gravity module to test out various unimportant things nobody in the serious space community cares about. For real though, when are we finally going to test this out?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 06:40:59 2019 No.11204207 >>11204163 As long as the muh microgravity cartel runs the research show, never.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 08:29:33 2019 No.11204359 >>11204086 yes, and they get spammed to shit, so the name was changed

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 08:47:08 2019 No.11204384 >>11203730 >500 Isp Seems really low for nuclear thermal, I'm guessing they have just set a low goal so they surpass it but the NERVA was getting over 800 nearly 50 years ago.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 08:48:52 2019 No.11204389 >>11204384 it's pressure fed blowdown, but instead of cold hydrogen it's heating the hydrogen with a reactor it's a really bad design

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 08:59:35 2019 No.11204400 >>11204389 Took me way too long to realise GH2 is gaseous hydrogen, guess I'm use to seeing LH2 when reading about rockets. I wonder why they didn't go autogenous pressurization LH2.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 09:01:22 2019 No.11204403 >>11204400 omfg it's not even liquid hydrogen, it's just gaseous hydrogen it's the worst possible design

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 10:01:00 2019 No.11204464 >>11203730 Congress is deliberately sabotaging this program by forbidding them from using highly enriched uranium because of made-up bullshit "proliferation concerns"

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 10:10:43 2019 No.11204474

>>11204464
There’s nothing in the legislation from Congress forcing NASA to use any certain type of reactor of fuel, from what I’ve read both NASA and Roscosmos have focused their recent NTP efforts on low-enriched systems because their safer and cheaper.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 10:16:17 2019 No.11204478 >>11204474 *or fuel

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 10:17:49 2019 No.11204480 >>11204474 highly enriched uranium can be used in a bomb as-is low enriched uranium is the primary feedstock if you're trying to breed plutonium to make a plutonium bomb

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 11:17:10 2019 No.11204545
File: 94 KB, 1274x774, Screen-Shot-2019-12-04-at-11.17.34-PM[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2019/12/multi-kilometer-space-telescopes-and-megameter-arrays.html

Behold, a Megameter Space Telescope

Seriously, we ought to have something like this by now. Fuck the JWST.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 11:18:11 2019 No.11204547 >>11204545 Have fun with your vapourware...

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 11:21:59 2019 No.11204557 >>11204545 Based, only worry would be the diffraction as light passed through the bubble skin

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 11:23:01 2019 No.11204563 >>11204545 this man's name is Brian Wang

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 11:33:02 2019 No.11204593 File: 503 KB, 2048x1365, 24941A3C-EA7C-4247-AD5E-C41C3DB28FEA.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Ice, ice baby...

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 11:42:23 2019 No.11204611 So CRS-19 and Progress MS-13 are both headed for the ISS. Seems like they are stocking up for Christmass lol. >>11204593 What is up with all those wires/cables?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 11:51:50 2019 No.11204637 >>11204611 lightning protection, dating back to the 60s

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 11:53:01 2019 No.11204639 >>11204637 Oh yeah, that makes sense. Thanks.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 11:55:17 2019 No.11204647 >>11204637 I thought it was an orthodox rocket under an Eruv but your explanation makes more sense.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 12:52:38 2019 No.11204785 File: 232 KB, 900x1200, gqmwmo322ey31.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11203730 >science thing with the word nuclear on it MR OBAMA PLEASE !!!!!

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 12:55:44 2019 No.11204792 >>11204785 I don't get who's this is supposed to be parodying.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:00:09 2019 No.11204801 >>11204792 me neither I think it violates global rule six

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:00:42 2019 No.11204803 >>11204403 Small steps, and big money. This technology could one day allow humans to reach Mars.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:02:48 2019 No.11204812

>>11204803
if your design goal is "run a reactor in space and don't melt it into a pile of slag" and that's all you want to learn how to do, it's a great design
the hard part is "run a turbopump off of a reactor in space while producing thrust using your coolant without turning it into a big ball of corium"

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:02:48 2019 No.11204813 >>11204792 >>11204801 what the fuck!!!!!! you guys didn't watch Chernobyl (tm) A Netfilx (tm) Original?!?!?!! 111

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:08:10 2019 No.11204827 >>11204801 It does, report and ignore.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:46:03 2019 No.11204896 File: 525 KB, 1536x2048, 743F6341-337F-4961-A8E0-E4629D7D646A.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Being a ground systems worker or part of the crew loading team must be really exciting and unnerving at the same time...

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:50:13 2019 No.11204902 >>11204812 Could the waste heat be used in a cogeneration process?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:58:03 2019 No.11204921 >>11204557 the bubble is optional

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:59:47 2019 No.11204925 >>11204896 At least its not a hypergolic propelled rocket.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:23:55 2019 No.11204961
File: 99 KB, 432x324, FF44BE78-9410-4753-91EC-F6ABBC0B0DF8.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>11204925
Yeah, the Shuttle’s external tank vent lines used to leak quite often, so there’s lots of footage of NASA ground systems engineers walking down the umbilical arms and patching the leaks. On the other hand, there’s also a very obscure video that you can only find in Chinese space enthusiast circles, which shows what happens when you try and do the same thing with hypergolic-fuelled LM rockets...

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:34:09 2019 No.11204975 >>11204902 the idea is to put all your waste heat out the engine bell

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:43:04 2019 No.11204984 >>11204384 >>500 Isp the main reason is the 1000K fuel temp

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:47:10 2019 No.11204996 File: 12 KB, 200x80, Wanglogo.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11204545 >>11204563 the Wang Space Telescope, the largest ever

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:48:09 2019 No.11204998 >>11204996 don't you think it would be kind of floppy?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:51:23 2019 No.11205004 File: 64 KB, 590x527, 1474900993803.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11204563 >>11204996 that's where you're Wang kiddo

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:51:38 2019 No.11205005 >>11204545 Turn it around, have mirrors be replaced by solar panels and make it into a giant laser array. Now you got a death laser super weapon.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:51:53 2019 No.11205006 >>11204961 Where is this video you speak of

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 15:54:47 2019 No.11205134
File: 952 KB, 4431x1808, 45ztqo6b63z31.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>11203071
SLS
>will probably only fly twice due to its expensive consumption of material
>expended components fall in the ocean and corrode
>only a handful of people will applaud it
Starship + superheavy
>fully recyclable
>will only need to be refurbished after a handful of flights
>could actually aid in the construction of huge ass space stations with autonomous fairing based models
>steel from the prototypes are reused for cybertrucks
>will rally up many people (largely redditfags, i will admit)

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:10:09 2019 No.11205157 >>11205134 >pointless speculation+dead meme=pointless post

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:29:41 2019 No.11205190 >>11202331 >>11202335 It was an initial test build. Quality standards are lower. Improper to extrapolate test failure meaning to later build efforts. No shit they'll have that licked in later builds.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:32:25 2019 No.11205198 >>11202341 Initial test build and they try and get some promotion and fun out of it, you dour bore. The existence of the latter rationals doesn't debase it like you think.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:38:51 2019 No.11205213

>>11202376

There is no good shuttle, there is a program that should be completely thrown out hidden behind a veil of bullshit that you can't see through and discern for what it is. Making the bullshit more opaque so critical thoughts never enter your comprehension but only the superlative space fan worship they've molded you to be boisterous about solely manifesting in your mind makes the entire thing more nefarious.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:41:22 2019 No.11205218 >>11202740 I wonder how low cost they got the price to be.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:45:34 2019 No.11205228 Type softly, and praise the SLS with your every post.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:46:27 2019 No.11205235 File: 81 KB, 640x370, eeee142cd1ceb796f736a15902aefea2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11205213 incorrect the original shuttle concepts were much the same idea as Starship

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:52:19 2019 No.11205251

>>11205235

A different lower unideal state to become stagnantly clung to forever with brain damaged morons huffing the circlejerk promotion fumes thinking it should never end and pushing their neverending glassy eyed cult junk on us all.

Not same execution. Could have been another hanger queen. Another project with bad economics papered over with patriotic fervor and brainwashing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:53:27 2019 No.11205253 >>11205251 yes, the beast known as SLS would have consumed even the best of the Shuttle concepts

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:55:24 2019 No.11205259

>>11203730

It'd be nice if NASA had more projects like this under its programmatic purview and some that weren't boondoggle junk wastes of time and money.

>>11204545

Blame SLS. Not for that specifically, but holding back the kind of space development that could be happening. Pushing back the space age in your lifetime by decades or a century.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:56:39 2019 No.11205264 >>11205259 anything with the word "nuclear" anywhere near it is guaranteed to become a boondoggle

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 16:57:57 2019 No.11205270 >>11205134 The market can stay irrational longer than you can remain solvent. SLS can continue irrationally because it is propped up by irrational individuals who genuinely believe in it or don't have the disposition to examine it or oppose it.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:05:43 2019 No.11205294

>>11205270
>The market can stay irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

There currently is no commercial market for crewed spaceflight to the Moon, or human spaceflight in general.

>SLS can continue irrationally because it is propped up by irrational individuals

Yes, because there’s no market for BLEO crewed spaceflight, there is no motivation for commercial investment. Therefore, any credible effort has to be propped up by the government.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:09:47 2019 No.11205306

>>11205235

Here's a different track for pondering. Don't build it right away. Have NASA do some research and development on rlv technologies and approaches while at the same time doing some interim human spaceflight program with investments in next generation rockets and spaceflight activities predicated on them in the interim period. Instead of 1970 space shuttle, 1990 space shuttle project after half a dozen test vehicles and materials and engine investment and development.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:13:06 2019 No.11205317

>>11205294

You missed the point. Yes, NASA should exist and have a program. No, SLS is not the manifestation of what that program should be and it should be rationally ended and other efforts baselines. No, that will not automatically happen because NASA is in the grip of headcases for whom SLS is the one true way and mediocrities and careerists who go with the flow, and some good apples prisoner of the circumstances.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:23:41 2019 No.11205343

>>11205264

Overblown hyperbole. Just that one. Lets do and include good nuke stuff, and not just bad nuke projects for nuclear for the sake of it, or because "the real way to get to mars is with nuclear thermal propulsion like the thinking of the 1980s told us", or so we'll state is our rational when really we're just pricks who want to slow down and mess up any mars activity because we want a SLS based speculative projected program of record and rhetoric, without any determination over what we're actually doing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:24:27 2019 No.11205345 >>11205343 congress will ensure it, anon

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:35:53 2019 No.11205376 >>11205343 >>11205317 >>11205306 >>11205270 >>11205259 >>11205251 >>11205218 >>11205213 >>11205198 >>11205190 Go away, Anon. You're not smart. You're pretentious.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:40:45 2019 No.11205390 >>11205376 Agreed, so little has been said with so many words...

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:47:16 2019 No.11205401

>>11205390
>>11205376

You have a filter that rejects any critical dissent by making false labels about it and about the motivation of the commentator so you dismiss whatever is said and don't give it any hearing in your mind. Only accept SLS like minded comments through the filter.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:55:06 2019 No.11205415

>https://phys.org/news/2019-11-australian-aggressive-cancer-cells-zero-gravity.html
Good news for space exploration. Zero G kills cancer cells.

6 months journey to mars may increase exposure to radiation, but it may not be deadly because 80-90% cancer cells you have in the body gets killed of.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:55:24 2019 No.11205418

Elon won the pedo lawsuit.
>Musk is nodding up and down. Unsworth stone faced
>Musk said in his way out of the court: “My faith in humanity is restored.”
>Another juror on their way out: “I don’t want to have anything to do with this.”

Mars isn't canceled, unpack it all up

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:57:54 2019 No.11205425 >>11205418 The only reason Unsworth lost is because he asked for $190 million fucking dollars, if he had asked for a reasonable amount, he would have won. Literally snatching defeat from the jaws of victory...

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:59:45 2019 No.11205430 >>11205425 Nah, it was obvious the exchange between the two was mutual and not Musk going after some random guy. If you shit on someone, expect someone to shit on you. Its karma.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 18:02:24 2019 No.11205435 >>11205415 Contact was right

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 18:10:30 2019 No.11205444

>>11205425
That's not even close to being accurate and it isn't how the legal system works. They don't find the other party liable based on the amount of money you ask for, that is decided after the ruling. He originally asked for 75,000.

Our /sfg/ insider said this would happen a few days ago.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 18:11:35 2019 No.11205449 >>11205418 There's still another case going through the British legal system. They may be more friendly towards Pedo Guy.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 18:12:23 2019 No.11205452 >>11205157 You mean like SLS flying?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 18:14:33 2019 No.11205454 >>11205449 True that, this case was held in a California court, so it’s not unthinkable that most people on the jury were either Musk’s plants or sympathisers/fans.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 18:15:06 2019 No.11205455

>>11205449
>Britain
>Legal system
Britain literally gives uncollectible awards against anonymous internet posters for hurt feelings. And America has a fun law that no libel, defamation or freedom of speech lawsuit in another country applies to America.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPEECH_Act

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 18:26:26 2019 No.11205470
File: 35 KB, 541x300, 1575672163957.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>11205454
Apparently one of the jury members owns two Teslas. I'm surprised that they made it through jury selection, but I think Elon Musk would have won the case regardless. We'll see if any jury members go public and tell us what happened behind the scenes.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 18:47:33 2019 No.11205496 >>11205415 If this is confirmed 100% true then consider starship fully funded and booked out to eternity.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:05:37 2019 No.11205520 >>11205470 There's shit ton of Teslas in California area making it the top 3 or something best seller.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:09:06 2019 No.11205528
File: 36 KB, 320x480, D8CD2CCD-714E-482E-9D81-B6D2372F3014.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Guess who quietly blew up a massive fuel tank using liquid nitrogen yesterday...this time on purpose...

https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/nasa-engineers-break-sls-test-tank-on-purpose-to-test-extreme-limits.html

NASA Engineers Break SLS Test Tank on Purpose to Test Extreme Limits:

>Engineers at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, on Dec. 5 deliberately pushed the world’s largest rocket fuel tank beyond its design limits to really understand its breaking point. The test version of the Space Launch System rocket’s liquid hydrogen tank withstood more than 260% of expected flight loads over five hours before engineers detected a buckling point, which then ruptured. Engineers concluded the test at approximately 11 p.m.

>The test version of the tank aced earlier tests, withstanding forces expected at engine thrust levels planned for Artemis lunar missions, showing no signs of cracks, buckling or breaking. The test on Dec. 5 -- conducted using a combination of gaseous nitrogen for pressurization and hydraulics for loads -- pushed the tank to the limits by exposing it to higher forces that caused it to break as engineers predicted. Earlier tests at Marshall certified the tank for both the current version of the SLS -- called Block 1, which will use an upper stage called the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage -- and the Block 1B version that will replace the ICPS with the more powerful Exploration Upper Stage.

>For all the tests, NASA and Boeing engineers simulated liftoff and flight stresses on a test version of the Space Launch System liquid hydrogen tank that is structurally identical to the flight tank. Throughout the tests in Marshall’s 215-foot-tall test stand, they used large hydraulic pistons to deliver millions of pounds of punishing compression, tension and bending forces on the robust test tank.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:11:28 2019 No.11205536 >>11205528 Didn't they say in the pre-test press release there "wasn't expected to be any large holes"?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:15:11 2019 No.11205544 >>11205536 There aren’t any holes, the tank unzipped down the seem like cryogenic tanks should when they fail.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:16:28 2019 No.11205545 >>11205528 >>11205536 ORANGE TANK BAD

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:17:10 2019 No.11205547 >>11205544 I thought the stir welding basically made it into a single homogeneous piece? Or do they only stir weld a single side?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:25:28 2019 No.11205562 >>11205547 I didn’t mean a literal seem, I’ve just been told many times by numerous people, that cryogenic tanks are supposed to unzip lengthways when failing because of too much pressure. It looks like this has happened in pic related...

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:34:01 2019 No.11205580 >>11205562 Interesting, I thought the top or bottom would be way more likely to blow than the cylinder.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:40:06 2019 No.11205596

>>11205580
I believe if the top or bottom blows first, it shows that the strength of the cylinder’s parts is unequal, if the cylinder fails down the lengthways seem (the middle) it shows the cylinder’s strength is uniform. Therefore, in a successful pressure test to failure the cylinder will fail down the seem.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:51:19 2019 No.11205633 >>11205544 >>11205562 >>11205596 >seem It's "seam".

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:55:19 2019 No.11205648 >>11205633 Oops my bad...

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:55:36 2019 No.11205650 >>11205528 >w-we totally did it on purpose, I swear! >completely unlike a certain someone whose top fell off

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 21:10:44 2019 No.11205786 >>11205528 They better release a video of this...

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:02:39 2019 No.11205852 >>11205259 >Pushing back the space age in your lifetime by decades or a century. How fucking true is this? Christ, I just want to go to space and start colonizing it already.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:14:19 2019 No.11205871 >>11205650 they literally announced it a day ahead of time

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:15:20 2019 No.11205874 >>11205401 >i use big words to say nothing at all

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:19:52 2019 No.11205882

>>11205852
If Starship works as intended then extremely accurate. Basically every part of it could have been built in the 70s with some r&d, computers may have been a problem but it would have just meant a larger mass fraction dedicated to computing. Everything else for off planet civilisation has been around for fucking ages, electrolysis machines, carbon scrubbers, airtight seals, hydroponics, etc... We literally could have colonies on the moon and Mars with sub 200k tickets by now.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:31:18 2019 No.11205902 >>11205882 Fuck I'm so upset over this not being a thing yet. If Von Braun had his way, we probably could've had colonies on Mars by now. How likely is it that human life could be extended with it keeping one's youth in the near future?

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:37:32 2019 No.11205912

>>11205902
Yeah Von Brauns concepts towards the end were becoming increasingly more like what starship is today.

>How likely is it that human life could be extended with it keeping one's youth in the near future?

Pretty much nil short of some kind of miracle. If you are still young you might have a shot at Mars or the moon in 10-20 years if you have some cash/assets and a set of practical skills.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:45:15 2019 No.11205928 >>11205912 >If you are still young you might have a shot at Mars or the moon in 10-20 years if you have some cash/assets and a set of practical skills. Working on it, anon. I want to go into computer science.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:49:01 2019 No.11205933 >>11205928 Go towards computer engineering if you want a space career.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:52:34 2019 No.11205942

>>11205928
>>11205933
Do neither, there are a million skilled programmers and will not be a large demand for them in space compared to skilled trades meaning you will have massive competition. If you are serious you need to acquire as many practical trades as possible. Electrical, plumbing, welding, heavy construction, heavy equipment operator, etc...

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:54:38 2019 No.11205947 File: 59 KB, 900x900, Sad alien hat.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11205942 Will Mars colony need dishwashers

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:55:29 2019 No.11205953

>>11205928
>Computer science
>Practical skills

How many computer scientists do you think they will need on the moon or Mars in the first few decades? I'm guessing almost none, that work will be for the most part done back on Earth. They need people to put shit together, building habitats, infrastructure, etc... Not to mention the oversaturation not the market with CS students.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 22:58:20 2019 No.11205961 >>11205947 Sorry m8, maybe you can be a janny at SpaceX.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:01:05 2019 No.11205969
File: 92 KB, 500x726, 1560210893049.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>11205947
Rod Serling, creator of the Twilight Zone, after getting back from WWII was a parachute tester.
A month before his wedding he got $1000 for testing a 'chute that killed the previous three testers.

If you're ballsy, go towards that. Become a tester. At least you'll die in a blaze of glory.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:02:35 2019 No.11205972 >>11205942 >>11205953 Damn, luckily I've only been taking general education classes at my college. I'm genuinely considering changing my degree. Holy shit

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:04:14 2019 No.11205976 File: 43 KB, 601x510, 1575596104656.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11205972 Whatever you do - take a lot of math. Do well in it.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:08:30 2019 No.11205984

>>11205972
>I'm genuinely considering changing my degree. Holy shit.

Ditch your degree entirely, the number one thing you will need is money to buy a ticket, it will not be cheap, you will need to scrimp and save I would say at least 200k, possibly more. That means.moving where housing is cheap and making massive mortgage repayments to build equity, staying with family in mom's basement or some other cheap accommodation such as a trailer, sailboats are also a good option since marina berths are usually central to a city and fairly cheap. Being in large debt for an ever devaluing piece of paper is a very bad move. Trades will make you money right off the bat and you can find work most anywhere, if you shirk at the idea of hot, hard, dirty work then I suggest you forget about space entirely because that's what it will be, maybe a little less dirty is all but with a million other immediately lethal hazards.

>>11205976
Ignore this retard.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:08:31 2019 No.11205985 >>11205976 B-b-but that's my worst subject

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:14:59 2019 No.11205996 >>11205972 College is a meme, better you learn this now than when you have 100k+ of debt.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:20:20 2019 No.11206004 >>11205984 >Ignore this retard. Literally everyone will tell you the same thing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:22:03 2019 No.11206009 >>11206004 >t. Delusional 20 year old maths autist who thinks mathematicians will be needed in space Wew

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:24:02 2019 No.11206013 >>11206009 It will be needed for the job that will ultimately get you into space.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:27:51 2019 No.11206022

>>11206013
Ah yes I'm sure all the skilled tradesmen (90%+ easy of early colonists) who will be building everything that you maths autists need to sit at a desk and crunch numbers on another planet will definitely need college level skills in maths. Imagine being this delusional.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:29:29 2019 No.11206025 >>11206022 I mean how much space does a calculator take up

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:30:48 2019 No.11206027 >>11206022 Oh, I see the issue, you think we're in the movies. Buddy, there ain't gonna be a colony in the next fifty years. Be realistic. You should have a military background and a STEM degree in a hard field (none of that meme soft science shit).

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:32:07 2019 No.11206033 >>11206027 Seethe harder NASA employee.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:42:42 2019 No.11206051

>>11206027
>Buddy, there ain't gonna be a colony in the next fifty years.
I mean, assuming NASA's funding doesn't keep getting cut and their plans restructured again and again and we continue towards progress in space, instead of limping off like after Apollo, it's possible.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:51:53 2019 No.11206064

>>11206051
NASA hasn't got a hope in hell of any kind of colony without a cheap launch vehicle. This means starship, which if it works means SpaceX will be up to their neck in cash with that and starlink especially which means they would have a bigger budget than NASA and could just bankroll whatever they want. Maybe NASA can hitch a ride.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 23:52:07 2019 No.11206066

>>11206051
Not that anon, but what are we calling a 'colony'? I mean, the ISS isn't a LEO colony. I'd think you could only call it that if the residents were intended to be permanent, and even then I'd almost want to wait for the first Martian birth to really call it more than a research base.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 00:04:45 2019 No.11206090 >>11206064 Well, I guess that could work too. But I mean it IS possible. >>11206066 >to really call it more than a research base. The first Martian colony will just grow out of the first research base eventually.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 00:16:50 2019 No.11206112 >>11206090 If you are hoping that NASA will get anything big done you are sorely deluded. Too many interest groups that want cash, too much politics.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:01:10 2019 No.11206188 >>11206112 If you think SpaceX will establish a Mars colony you are sorely deluded.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:03:15 2019 No.11206196 >>11206112 >>11206188 You both make me depressed.

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:12:47 2019 No.11206209
File: 394 KB, 700x525, gigachadmusk2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>11206188
>you can't build a liquid-fueled rocket!
>well you can't get it to orbit!
>well you can't make a bigger rocket!
>well you can't land it on land!
>well you can't land it on a boat!
>well you can't reuse one of those rockets additional times!
>well you can't make a more powerful variant of that rocket!

When will you irrelevant faggots stop being wrong?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:15:57 2019 No.11206214 >>11206209 >When will you irrelevant faggots stop being wrong? When they expire

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:17:42 2019 No.11206219
File: 3.24 MB, 5000x3000, p5mc67yswb931[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>11206209
>Grey Dragon will be a thing!
>Red Dragon will fly in 2017!
>Falcon will have second-stage recovery!
>Falcon Heavy will fly in 2015!
>Falcon Heavy will fly in 2016!
>Falcon Heavy will fly in 2017!
>Falcon Heavy will fly in 2018!
>Commercial crew will fly in 2017!
>Commercial crew will fly in 2018!
>Commercial crew will fly in 2019!
>Commercial crew will fly in 2020!

When will you irrelevant faggots stop being wrong?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:19:29 2019 No.11206221 >>11206219 Don't forget FH crossfeed and million dollar Falcon flights

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:19:53 2019 No.11206222 >>11206219 oh noooooooooo delays in aerospace? absolutely unprecedented!

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:21:39 2019 No.11206229 >>11206222 Shut the fuck up, Constellation will fly in 2008 guaranteed

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:22:55 2019 No.11206233
File: 119 KB, 1200x679, EFgSAh6XYAAN3BH[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>11206222
>delays are to be expected in aerospace
>"why the fuck is [insert competitor] late? why the fuck are they getting money?"
>"why the fuck is the NASA administrator saying commercial crew was delayed? it's just because of [insert excuse here] blocking SpaceX!"

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:23:57 2019 No.11206235 >>11206229 literally not an argument

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:26:15 2019 No.11206239 File: 60 KB, 452x339, Thats_the_joke.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11206235 Yeah I know

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:28:48 2019 No.11206246 File: 224 KB, 1920x1280, KSC-20190830-PH_JBS02_0006large[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Say what you want about SLS, but it's nice to see the VAB being used for its original purpose.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:29:22 2019 No.11206248 >>11201067 Earth is flat

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:31:18 2019 No.11206252 Why waste the thirty seconds to reset your router when you get banned for shitposting the same tired trash for the 10,000th time Go masturbate, it'd be more productive.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:57:41 2019 No.11206283 >>11206219 everything spacex does is either delayed or cancelled in favor of something more ambitious (that is then delayed) by this logic musk will build a dyson sphere in 2100

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 02:00:46 2019 No.11206288 >>11206283 >New York Times 2100: "Why Musk's new Dyson SWARM (not sphere) isn't that impressive, and why that's a good thing"

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 02:03:02 2019 No.11206290 >>11206248 No it isn’t.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 02:08:04 2019 No.11206299 >>11206219 >Things are delayed Ooo so surprising. Musk is still the best thing in space flight

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 02:22:02 2019 No.11206319 >>11206112 >Too many interest groups that want cash, too much politics. What would it take for them to get a decent budget these days?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 02:24:14 2019 No.11206325 >>11206219 At least criticize accurately, FH did fly in 2018

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 02:34:18 2019 No.11206344 >>11206319 A nonexistent and impossible President with no senate or house in existence.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 02:49:31 2019 No.11206366 >>11206344 God Emperor of Mankind/Oprah 2024

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 05:49:12 2019 No.11206609 >>11206290 You don't know that.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 05:52:20 2019 No.11206616 >>11206609 Yes I do. Night and day would be impossible on a flat or square or triangle or any other shape.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 05:56:16 2019 No.11206624 File: 606 KB, 2048x1366, 427A2079-345E-4CDB-AF3D-7C5D6F002E87.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] The Chinese have just done the double: with 2 Kuaizhou 1A‘s launching from the same launch site in under 6 hours.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 05:57:33 2019 No.11206628 File: 385 KB, 2048x1365, 8E326C9B-7101-4BC8-BDBC-957677AB007C.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11206624

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 06:45:03 2019 No.11206716 >>11205528 well some of them are built so the side doesn't fall off at all

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 06:51:56 2019 No.11206726 >>11206624 What? A reusable launch site? China superpower 2020!

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 06:58:22 2019 No.11206743 >>11206726 Number of launches in 2019: China: 28 US: 19 Nothing personal western piggu...

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 07:15:09 2019 No.11206782 >>11206726 It's a TEL and can launch anywhere. The one in the first pic didn't even have lightning protection (they just picked somewhere empty) and they didn't even bother to paint the rockets

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 07:24:28 2019 No.11206799 >>11206782 This is why China will win.

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 08:37:01 2019 No.11206880

Elon Musk’s tweets calling caver Vernon Unsworth, who was involved in the rescue of 13 people from a cave in Thailand, a “pedo guy” do not meet the legal standard for defamation, a jury found Friday afternoon. As a result, Musk will not be liable for damages.

The decision had to do with defamation law as the judge had laid it out. There were five points: first, that the statements had to be made to a person other than Unsworth; second, that the statements had to be understood to be about Unsworth; third, that the statements had to be understood to mean Unsworth was a pedophile; fourth, that the statements were false; and fifth, that the statements were reckless.

Interesting. Apparently the jury didn't make it past the second point before deciding.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 08:49:23 2019 No.11206904 >>11206880 Wonder how many Jury members were Musk fanboys.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 08:59:34 2019 No.11206916 >>11206904 Musk won due to his haters, not his fans.

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:23:27 2019 No.11206954

>>11206916
It was bit of both honestly, the case took place at a Los Angeles courtroom (Musk’s home turf and notorious for being inhabited by celebrity worshippers) with people who owned multiple Teslas being allowed on the Jury. But Unsworth (his hater) did some retarded shit as well, like asking for $190 million(!) in compensation. The whole situation is just stupid, it sets a bad precedent for future defamation cases, with someone being able to falsely accuse somebody of being a pedophile in front of a large public audience without punishment.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:27:02 2019 No.11206958 >>11206954 I forget. Did musk directly accuse him of being a pedo or did he just say "I bet he is one"?

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:29:49 2019 No.11206959

>>11206904
>Wonder how many Jury members were Musk fanboys.
Do you believe they did not act in accordance of the jury instructions given to them?

No one would know who Elon Musk was referring to without the media constantly dramatizing the argument for views and encouraging it in the first place by asking some random diver what he thought about the sub, despite the fact that he wasn't on the dive team going into the cave and he had no knowledge that the leader of the dive team specifically instructed Musk and his engineers to keep working on it so that they could have a backup option. It's clear what the media did was opinion shopping. They wanted to find someone who would talk shit about the sub or else they would have just asked the person leading the rescue attempt or the Thai government which has since given Elon a medal for him and his team's contributions to the rescue mission.
>>11206954
> it sets a bad precedent for future defamation cases
That's ridiculous. The standards for defamation have always been extremely high in the US. If I call you an idiot in public, should I have to prove that your IQ is below that of normal or else it's defamation? You just find the pedo insult particularly distasteful but it was intended to be just an insult before a private detective stated that he was true and lied to Elon Musk about the divers sexual history with minors. That wasn't covered under the trial and the jury was instructed to only look at the first comment.

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:34:15 2019 No.11206966

>>11206959
>Thai government which has since given Elon a medal for him and his team's contributions to the rescue mission.

Umm no they didn’t, the actual divers got medals, Elon got the middle finger.

https://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKCN1RV0QU?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:36:03 2019 No.11206967

>>11206966
>King Vajiralongkorn has conferred various honours on 187 people in connection with the rescue, 113 of them foreigners including Tesla Inc Chief Executive Elon Musk, who were involved in the effort, according to the Royal Gazette in March.

Doesn't sound like a middle finger to me.

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:38:09 2019 No.11206970

>>11206966
>Umm no they didn’t,
Yes, they did. They awarded him Member of the Order of the Direkgunabhorn by the King of Thailand, which would sound impressive if it wasn't a shitty country, but that's besides the point.

You can even see that "Mr. Elon Reeve Musk" is on this list:
http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2562/B/007/T_0001.PDF

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:41:29 2019 No.11206977 >>11206970 Shut up. TV told me that Musk is bad. I believe TV not your stupid random internet source. Kind of embarrassing actually.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:44:03 2019 No.11206984 >>11206954 Musk won cause his haters always painted Musk as full of bullshit. Unsworth was never in danger of being "defamed" because Elon's bullshit was called out instantly by his haters.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:46:06 2019 No.11206986 >>11206984 That makes no sense.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:47:38 2019 No.11206988 >>11206986 neither Musk haters nor fanboys make any sense the same can be said for the rule of law

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:48:43 2019 No.11206993 >>11206988 k

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 09:55:24 2019 No.11207006 Can we stop all this off topic crap about the stupid lawsuit? Look at this cool video about the recent Chinese double-launch instead: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o15cC5HrTQQ

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 10:00:54 2019 No.11207020 >>11207006 >He actually wants to talk about rockets in a thread about pedo guys Okay, nerd.

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 10:03:17 2019 No.11207029

>>11206986
It's a fact that Unsworth can't prove that he was harassed or damaged due to Musk's insult. He still received honors and such. And most of the media coverage I saw of this pretty much lambasted Musk over his tweet, and not much about Unsworth himself.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 10:27:11 2019 No.11207063 >>11206904 Who cares? Insulting people is not a crime, and it shouldn’t be. It’s just some guy trying to money grab.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 10:28:48 2019 No.11207065 >>11206970 Thailand is an awesome country. Creampied five traps there

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 10:40:24 2019 No.11207090 >>11206219 shouldn't you be focused on fixing your self-hijacking airliner?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 11:01:29 2019 No.11207119 >>11207065 how do you creampie a trap?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 11:04:28 2019 No.11207124 >>11207119 you put your penis in their butthole

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 11:19:26 2019 No.11207155 >>11206988 I'll take the opposite approach. Everyone makes sense, including the law. You just need a frame of reference.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 11:20:30 2019 No.11207159 >>11207155 you know what makes sense guns guns make sense

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 12:35:07 2019 No.11207301 >>11207119 >>11207124

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 15:26:55 2019 No.11207626 >open cycle engines why is this allowed?

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 16:47:27 2019 No.11207798
File: 483 KB, 598x361, jxl995w1b6u31.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/06/boeing-space-launch-system-nasa-076752

>Is Boeing's mega space rocket back on track?

>...But Jennifer Boland-Masterson, the director of Boeing operations at NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility, insists the program's problems are firmly in the past. And she can prove it by comparing the first rocket, which is nearing completion and will fly the uncrewed Artemis 1 mission around the moon, with the second, which is being built at the NASA facility in New Orleans and will bring humans back to the moon.

>"We're seeing 68 percent improvement in quality from core stage one to core stage two," she said. "That's your learning curves and your innovations."

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 16:48:01 2019 No.11207801

>>11207626
Depends on propellant choice and the hardware in general.

Merlin 1D Vac for example is actually more efficient than the RD-180 in space despite the former being an open cycle gas generator and the latter being a staged combustion engine with extremely high chamber pressure.

If all you want is efficiency but you don't wanna develop anything too complicated just make a vacuum optimized hydrogen-oxygen gas generator engine, you'll get ~420 Isp on you upper stages.

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 17:09:06 2019 No.11207838

>>11207801
>Merlin 1D Vac for example is actually more efficient than the RD-180 in space despite the former being an open cycle gas generator and the latter being a staged combustion engine with extremely high chamber pressure.

That’s just because RD-180 is a sea-level engine and the MVac has a massive vacuum-optimised nozzle, their not really comparable...

>just make a vacuum optimized hydrogen-oxygen gas generator engine, you'll get ~420 Isp on your upper stages

The only two hydrogen gas generators I can think of (Vulcain and RS-68) are both first-stage engines, hydrogen upper-stage engines almost exclusively use expander/expander-bleed cycles to maximise efficiency and because hydrogen’s fluid/gas dynamics lend themselves to the aforementioned cycle.

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 17:19:51 2019 No.11207867

>>11207838
>The only two hydrogen gas generators I can think of (Vulcain and RS-68) are both first-stage engines, hydrogen upper-stage engines almost exclusively use expander/expander-bleed cycles to maximise efficiency and because hydrogen’s fluid/gas dynamics lend themselves to the aforementioned cycle
There's the Rocketdyne J-2.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 17:48:00 2019 No.11207944 >>11207798 >68% improvement in quality what does this even mean >>11207838 J-2 is a hydrogen gas generator J-2X is some bizarre open cycle thing that I don't understand BE-7U is an open cycle expander

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 17:48:17 2019 No.11207946

>>11207867
Your right, the J-2 was an effort to build an efficient upper-stage engine that was powerful enough to propel large rocket stages, unlike the existing RL-10. However, these days it seems companies prefer to open the expander cycle instead of switching to a gas generator, to gain that extra thrust. For example, Blue Origin’s BE-3U (790 kN) and Japan’s LE-9 (1,471 kN) both use an open expander cycle, I guess this is because it allows the engine to get the same thrust or better as a gg, whilst partially retaining the superior efficiency of the expander.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 17:50:54 2019 No.11207952 >>11207944 My guess is it refers to the amount of inspections aced on the first try. A 68% increase would mean that you're installing things correctly the first time 68% more than you were before.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 17:53:15 2019 No.11207956 >>11207944 J-2X used a gas generator, BE-3U uses an open expander and BE-7 is completely unique, using a never seen before dual-expander cycle.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 18:17:59 2019 No.11208000 >>11207946 The LE-9 truly is a beautiful engine... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v2KrzkqdtvU

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 19:07:32 2019 No.11208104 >>11206958 He followed up on his initial tweet with a second one saying "I bet it‘s true“

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 19:35:11 2019 No.11208176 >>11203272 thicc space bois are the future.

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 19:39:05 2019 No.11208195

>>11203272
>oldspace
>make everything super lightweight and thin so that even a single Martian fart breaks it

>newspace
>make everything chunky and thicc so you could throw it down stairs, set it on fire, drop a piano on it, divorce it, take the kids, and it'll still be functional and ready to go

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 19:54:05 2019 No.11208229

>>11208195
I mean none of this makes sense, considering all rocket companies past and present have tried to maximise performance by cutting as much mass as possible, why would you purposefully sandbag your vehicle’s performance? Even Starship uses thin steel to reduce it’s mass as much as possible...

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 19:58:48 2019 No.11208245 File: 295 KB, 1125x1178, 99A6669C-4E6E-496A-84DE-9326528921EB.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] This is really interesting, ULA treats Kerosene like a storable propellant:

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 20:00:08 2019 No.11208249 >>11208245 But kerosene is storeable though.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 20:04:54 2019 No.11208265 >>11208245 I mean, why not?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 20:44:44 2019 No.11208329 >>11208249 >>11208265 I guess it's in contrast to SpaceX using cryogenic meme kerosene

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 20:56:44 2019 No.11208351 >>11208329 The cryogenic meme nets them significant performance advantage

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 21:06:52 2019 No.11208367 >>11208351 I think they also do it because if they made the Falcon 9 longer to carry the same amount of propellant but not-chilled then the rocket would be too long.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 22:17:48 2019 No.11208491 >>11208367 the rocket would also be heavier

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 23:33:15 2019 No.11208593 >>11205528 >mfw the SLS shill making fun of SpaceX for an exploding mk1 gets his own medicine and >>11206188 If you think SLS will fly more than 2 times, you're even more delusional.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 23:36:40 2019 No.11208599 File: 41 KB, 452x452, IMG_20191201_223031_312.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>11208593 *>mfw

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 00:01:44 2019 No.11208641 >>11208491 That is to say, it wouldn't have as good a mass fraction.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 00:18:35 2019 No.11208679 >>11205528 This isn't very typical, I'd like to make that point!

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

/sci/ - Science & Math