/sfg/ Space Flight General

[Anonymous No.11217677]

New Shepard Edition

Last time on 'es-ef-gee': >>11209698

[Anonymous No.11217683]

You win this thread war

[Anonymous No.11217685]

Are they ever launching a big rocket?

[Anonymous No.11217687]

>>11217685
New Glenn is projected to launch sometime in 2021. Blue has been good at keeping dates. Plus they got the attention of the USAF so they must have something good.

[Anonymous No.11217689]

>>11217685
I mean they literally just showed us a sneak peek of inside the factory where their building New Glenn (a big rocket). To answer your question: hopefully in 2021.

[Anonymous No.11217693]

>>11217677
does this thing have a '' warp drive on it

[Anonymous No.11217702]

Next flight "soon"... so sometime before next December?

[Anonymous No.11217706]

>>11217687
Does the little rocket have the same engine and components that will be on the big rocket? That was one of the neat things about Falcon 1, that it was directly testing the engine and avionics that would be used on the Falcon 9.

[Anonymous No.11217707]

>>11217677
that rocket looks filthy

[Anonymous No.11217714]

>>11217706
Sort of, New Glenn uses a heavily modified version of the BE-3 (New Shepard’s engine) for it’s upper-stage engines. There’s probably some similarity in the avionics as well, but overall their very different vehicles. New Glenn is a revolutionary launch vehicle for Blue Origin and not an evolution of New Shepard.

[Anonymous No.11217716]

>>11217707
It’s flown 6 times, with “minimal refurbishment” so that’s to be expected.

[Anonymous No.11217720]

>>11217706
Sort of. The first stage will use different engines from the New Shepard (the BE-4), but the upper stage will use the BE-3U which is a development of the BE-3 engine on the New Shepard. There's probably tons of little developmental details that were learned on the New Shepard that would be carried over to the New Glenn, such as how to glide the booster before landing. So it's not as of a direct transition from New Shepard to New Glenn like from the Falcon 1 to the Falcon 9, but that's mostly down to SpaceX having limited funding at the time and had to reuse as much as possible. Blue Origin has a much more comfortable financial situation right now than SpaceX was in years ago.

[Anonymous No.11217730]

>>11217720
>There's probably tons of little developmental details that were learned on the New Shepard that would be carried over to the New Glenn, such as how to glide the booster before landing.

I’m pretty sure a lot of these developmental details are to do with software and avionics, as I remember reading that Blue Moon’s landing software is derived from New Shepard. I assume the same is true for New Glenn.

[Anonymous No.11217756]

Some notable screenshots from Blue’s promo-reels:

Their new headquarters is a giant circus tent...

[Anonymous No.11217768]

>>11217756
Some kind of dystopian automated fighting vehicle, which Bezos uses to enforce his will upon his employees. It’s sitting next to a bulkhead welding machine that’s obviously displeased the boss.

[Anonymous No.11217778]

>>11217768
A large friction stir welding machine in the process of welding New Glenn tank segments.

[Anonymous No.11217796]

Does anybody know what kind of welding machine this is/what it’s for?

[Anonymous No.11217806]

>>11217796
that's for making the cages he keeps his workers in

[Anonymous No.11217827]

>>11217796
It's a TIG welder
Looks like a miller dynasty 400 or so

[Anonymous No.11218026]

>>11217778
SpaceX btfo by that supreme welding technique

[Anonymous No.11218050]

>>11218026
I mean SpaceX also uses friction stir welding for Falcon 9 and Heavy (pic related), just on a smaller scale. Literally everybody notable in the rocket business, apart from Rocket Lab because Electron is composite and SpaceX with Scrapship, uses this technique to manufacture their tanks.

[Anonymous No.11218082]

>>11217707
LET'S CLEAN IT UP!

(Newfags don't know...)

[Anonymous No.11218087]

Why all the fanboi shit in these threads? I hope all these space endeavors have success.

>Moar spaceships!

[Anonymous No.11218170]

>>11218087
I hope SLS doesn't just end up being a waste of money

[Anonymous No.11218185]

>>11217677
So I saw the launch, it looked very weird to me.

1) It took ~7 seconds after count down/ignition started to lift the rocket.

2) They said it went to (((space))) but looked awfully lot like it simply went slight above atmosphere.

3) Hover landing took ~10 seconds. Are they going to be okay with larger vehicles?

[Anonymous No.11218197]

>>11218185
>They said it went to (((space))) but looked awfully lot like it simply went slight above atmosphere.
what do you think space is

[Anonymous No.11218213]

>>11218185
1. yes, they're overly conservative with their liftoff thrust curves for checkouts, they won't be able to get away with that when they're trying to go orbital
2. nigga, the next town over is farther away than the ground you're standing on is from space
it's only 100km up
3. yes, they're overly conservative with their landing profiles, they won't be able to get away with that when they try to go orbital
tl;dr: new shepard is dumb as heck

[Anonymous No.11218257]

>>11218185
>1) It took ~7 seconds after count down/ignition started to lift the rocket.
They're just waiting until they're absolutely sure that the engine is operating nominally before lift off. It looks odd compared to other launches, but since this rocket is just a suborbital hopper there's no narrow launch windows that it needs to meet so they can afford to wait abit.

>2) They said it went to (((space))) but looked awfully lot like it simply went slight above atmosphere.
That's where space begins, slightly above* the atmosphere. Again, it's just a suborbital hopper, it doesn't need to go further.

>3) Hover landing took ~10 seconds. Are they going to be okay with larger vehicles?
Probably not, but they can do that with this rocket due to the relatively low demands it needs to meet. New Glenn will hover too, but it's expected to hover less.

[Anonymous No.11218355]

>>11218185
>It took ~7 seconds after count down/ignition started to lift the rocket.

Why would build a rocket for tourists/non-astronauts/normal people that has a violent liftoff sequence? The idea is to make it as comfortable as possible by limiting Gs. Furthermore, have you ever seen a Soyuz launch? Count how long the ignition sequence lasts, it’s never been a problem for all the 60 years it’s been in service. Actually, I’m pretty sure quicker liftoffs are rougher on an engine’s turbines/plumbing, so a reusable vehicle having a longer sequence makes sense.

>They said it went to (((space))) but looked awfully lot like it simply went slight above atmosphere.

The vehicle went 104km up, space is internationally recognised as starting at 100km. The atmosphere doesn’t just stop at a certain point, there’s still atmospheric particles at 400km+, which is why the ISS is affected by atmospheric drag.

>Hover landing took ~10 seconds. Are they going to be okay with larger vehicles?

The hover landing is great and far superior to a suicide burn when you have excess performance and the margins aren’t tight. Whether Blue Origin can also do it with New Glenn, depends entirely on the dry mass of NG and BE-4’s throttling capabilities. To hover a rocket, it must have a thrust to weight ratio of below 1 when dry, Blue achieved this with NS by making it overweight and having an engine that can throttle below 20%.

>>11218213
>tl;dr: new shepard is dumb as heck

It’s actually the opposite, it’s a great design for a large scientific sounding rocket and suborbital thrill ride. Safe, lots of space for cargo/passengers and fully reusable, with the added perk of massive windows.

[Anonymous No.11218360]

>>11218355
*Why would you

[Anonymous No.11218408]

Looks like Space Force is a done deal, the NDAA has made it through the Demoncrap-controlled House and is on it’s way to the Senate.

[Anonymous No.11218411]

>>11217677
what is that thing, a propane tank?

[Anonymous No.11218434]

>>11218411
*liquid hydrogen and oxygen tank

[Anonymous No.11218437]

>>11218408
>I AM THE SENATE

[Anonymous No.11218452]

>>11218411
Let me talk to you about liquid hydrogen and liquid hydrogen accessories.

[Anonymous No.11218477]

Reminder to listen to the descent and landing of the best and most aesthetic Apollo, going on 47 years ago as we speak
http://www.apollo17.org

[Anonymous No.11218482]

>>11218452
why don't they just use rocket fuel or quantum tech

[Anonymous No.11218493]

>>11218482
that's... they did
they literally used both of those things

[Anonymous No.11218571]

>>11218408
Mega based.

[Anonymous No.11218606]

>>11218408
>>11218571
America Ad Astra!

[Anonymous No.11218613]

>>11218606

[Anonymous No.11218628]

>>11218613
>inb4 "the USSF won't be like that"
I know, but it's fun to imagine.

[Anonymous No.11218643]

Some pretty HD pics of NS-12:

[Anonymous No.11218648]

>>11218643

[Anonymous No.11218652]

>>11218648

[Anonymous No.11218658]

>>11218652

[Anonymous No.11218690]

>>11218643
>>11218648
>>11218652
>>11218658

[Anonymous No.11218922]

>>11218437
You will be helpless to stop the creation of countless DEPOTS in orbit and beyond, once the military begins work on space projects independent of NASA!

[Anonymous No.11219022]

How many degrees would it take to become an astronaut?

[Anonymous No.11219027]

>>11219022
At least 180, maybe even 360

[Anonymous No.11219099]

>>11218477
Thanks for the reminder, I forgot this existed

[Anonymous No.11219160]

so uh
uhhh

>End Times author and SkyWatch TV CEO Tom Horn appeared on “The Jim Bakker Show” today, where he asserted that President Donald Trump authorized the creation of a “U.S. Space Force” because he knows that the asteroid prophesied in the Book of Revelation is headed toward Earth.
>Horn was on Bakker’s show today to promote his latest book, “The Wormwood Prophecy,” which claims that the government is covering up the fact that an asteroid known as Apophis will strike the Earth in 2029. While scientists say that Apophis will simply pass by our planet in 2029, Horn insists that it will strike the Earth and fulfill the prophecy in Revelation 8: “The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water— the name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter.”
>Horn claims that he discovered this information when he was shown a vision of what he thought was “a dual-horned, fiery dragon deep in space” that he described as “the most terrifying thing I’ve ever seen in my life.”
>When he awoke from this vision, Horn said, “something whispered in my ear, ‘Apophis.'”
>“Apophis, I am convinced, is going to impact the earth in nine years from now,” Horn warned. “And when it does, I think it’s the fulfillment of the Wormwood prophecy.”
>“Don’t forget, Donald Trump has prophecy-believers in his ear,” Horn added, “and that’s the reason why he was pushing for the new space command, all the additional money for earth defense forces. This is all quietly going on behind the scene.”

https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/tom-horn-knows-the-real-reason-behind-the-creation-of-trumps-space-force/

[Anonymous No.11219161]

>>11218922
how did DEPOTS meme start?

[Anonymous No.11219190]

>>11219160
I think that's good, honestly. If the US government is assuming a proactive role in space again because the President wants to avert a doomsday prophecy or is at least significantly influenced by people who do, I'm glad, because that means more people in space.

[Anonymous No.11219195]

>>11219161
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/08/rocket-scientist-says-that-boeing-squelched-work-on-propellant-depots/

It started when George Sowers, a former employee at ULA, came out and claimed that Senator Shelby shut down the propellant depot project that ULA was working on due to fears that it'll compete with the SLS. This claims weren't conformed 100%, but ULA did have the ACES program in it's future plans which where then quietly dropped around the time George claimed when Shelby threw a hissy fit.

There was also an anon who claimed to be in the same university that George works in now. He said that was going to talk to George to get solid evidence of Dick Shelby dicking around, but he never delivered.

[Anonymous No.11219219]

>>11219195
Anon never delivers

[Anonymous No.11219285]

>>11219219
hi, that Mines anon here. I completely forgot. I apologize.
Can still go ask him of course

[Anonymous No.11219292]

>>11219219
Hello, that Mines anon. Ignore the other guy he is fake news, thought I did forget.
I will ask him in about 3 hours.

[Anonymous No.11219305]

>>11219292
Sowers isn't in the GRL this late you larper

[Anonymous No.11219397]

>>11219160
Good, if it takes religious kooks to finally build a fucking asteroid response system I'm all on board the crazy train. Tell everyone Apophis is going to hit us, so they vote for more space funding.

[Anonymous No.11219764]

>>11217687
Good at keeping dates? New Shepard was supposed to send humans in 2017

[Anonymous No.11219916]

You guys will never guess who just won a commercial launch contract...

[Anonymous No.11219928]

>>11219916
OmegA rocket will launch up to two NationSats for Saturn Satellite Networks:

>Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE: NOC) announced that Saturn Satellite Networks has selected the OmegA space launch vehicle to launch up to two satellites on the rocket’s inaugural flight scheduled for spring 2021. OmegA will launch from Kennedy Space Center’s Pad 39B and insert the SSN satellites into a geosynchronous transfer orbit.

https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grumman-signs-customer-for-first-flight-of-omegaTM

[Anonymous No.11220034]

>>11219195

[Anonymous No.11220223]

>>11219928
Is that Omega's first contract?
Honestly didn't know it's supposed to launch from 39B. Will the pad be ready for it, and does this put Omega's launch schedule at the mercy of SLS prep/launching? Also Omega is absolutely dwarfed by the MLP.

[Anonymous No.11220233]

>>11220223
Reminds me of this, sort of.

[Anonymous No.11220243]

Rocket Lab new launch pad event soon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vu-ZisFbjFo

[Anonymous No.11220266]

What's New Zealand's endgame?

[Anonymous No.11220268]

>>11220266
New Zealand superiority in space over Australia.

[Anonymous No.11220270]

>>11220243
USAF launch from Wallops "early next year"

[Anonymous No.11220273]

>>11220266
Elysium amidst the collapse of civilization, probably.

[Anonymous No.11220292]

>>11220270
>USAF Lt. Col. Meagan Thrush says that first Electron mission from LC-2, called STP-27RM, will carry a smallsat called Monolith to test the ability of smallsats to host large aperture space weather payloads.

[Anonymous No.11220309]

>tim

[Anonymous No.11220375]

>>11220243
Am I the only one who seems the similarities?

[Anonymous No.11220534]

>>11218082
Every day until you launch it

[Anonymous No.11221185]

>imagine the sound

[Anonymous No.11221200]

>>11221185
lmao is that meant to be an apollo capsule on the top?

[Anonymous No.11221209]

>>11221200
Yes.

pic related

[Anonymous No.11221270]

>>11220268
Already achieved and as an Aussie I'm salty as fuck about it. Australia should have been the 4th nation to get to orbit but mommy UK said stop so our faggot politicians did instead of declaring independence.

[Anonymous No.11221293]

>>11221270
No, it was necessary to deny Australia access to space. If they had the technology, then it would be only a matter of time before the emus get their filthy claws on that. You DON'T want emus in space.

[Anonymous No.11221304]

>>11221293
there's a reason God denied emus the ability to fly

[Anonymous No.11221316]

>>11217768
Experimental wagie cagie.

[Anonymous No.11221330]

Holy shit. Mars has water like right under the surface.

[Anonymous No.11221335]

>>11221330
You dropped this.
https://www.engadget.com/2019/12/12/nasa-ice-surface-mars/

[Anonymous No.11221349]

>>11221330
I swear I've seen a story about NASA confirming Mars having water ice like 5 times in the past few years.

[Anonymous No.11221352]

>>11221349
Not this shallow, not on so much of the planet, and well I think that's enough negativity!

[Anonymous No.11221359]

>>11221330
I thought water was confirmed years ago?

[Anonymous No.11221370]

>>11221352
Didn't Phoenix find water ice just by scooping a bit of dirt back in 08?

[Anonymous No.11221385]

>>11221359
>not the story

>>11221370
>one location

[Anonymous No.11221386]

>>11221349
Every time NASA quietly announces they’ve found water or ice somewhere new on Mars, the media turns it into sensationalist headlines about NASA having discovered ice or water on Mars for the first time, even though this isn’t the case.

[Anonymous No.11221406]

>>11221386
Gotta hype up space without much substantial work happening somehow.

[Anonymous No.11221433]

>>11221359
Yes, but this is ice just under the surface. Potentially exploitable.

[Anonymous No.11221630]

>>11221406
The worst part is running the "ice on mars" headline yearly makes people think nothing is happening when in reality there is new data. Just changing the headline to "more ice than expected on mars" would be more accurate and show that new data has been gathered.

[Anonymous No.11221636]

>https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/goddard/2018/mars-terraforming/
>terraforming Mars actually ISN'T possible

we... we got too cocky spacebros...

[Anonymous No.11221653]

>>11221636
Teraforming isn't a prerequisite for colonization. And even if teraforming is possible, then the technology required would be so far into the future and the process would take so long that we today would never see it come to be.

[Anonymous No.11221694]

>>11221636
even in science fiction we don't get terraforming started until the 2400s

[Anonymous No.11221743]

>>11221636
Robots don’t need to terraform lol.
The thin atmosphere is better because you need less delta/v to get to orbit.

[Anonymous No.11221761]

QUIT MEMEING AND GET TO WORK ON STARSHIP YOU FUCK

[Anonymous No.11221768]

>>11221761
Posting webm for full effect

[Anonymous No.11221776]

>>11221768
who is that absolutely qt beside him and is she thrusting his starship

[Anonymous No.11221786]

>>11221776
Ikuma Nakamura, and hopefully not

[Anonymous No.11221791]

>>11221776
ikumi nakamura

[Anonymous No.11221793]

>>11221761
>NEVER! I'M GONNA SAY THE D-WORD INSTEAD!

[Anonymous No.11221794]

>>11221636
Nah, reading this just means we need more outlandish terraforming methods. Nuking the poles or dropping ice asteroids are no longer enough.

[Anonymous No.11221814]

>>11221794
Let's brainstorm. What's the most ridiculous but potentially possible method you can think of for increasing atmospheric density on Mars?

[Anonymous No.11221851]

>>11221814
sulfur hexaflouride as the buffer gas instead of nitrogen

[Anonymous No.11221857]

>>11221814
Send bulk shipments of humans from Earth to Mars from 3rd world countries and throw them outside to dessicate and release their volatiles, including water, nitrogen, carbon etc. Gets rid of exploding populations of brown people and delivers important elements to Mars, plus we'd prove out the technology needed to at least get people TO Mars alive, which would make the technology necessary to do two-way transport with white people a lot easier.

[Anonymous No.11221896]

>>11221814
The most efficient and simple way would simply be a giant mirror array/lens, laser the living shit out of the surface to release fuckloads of CO2 trapped in rocks, you won't be able to breathe it but do it long enough and you can walk around without a suit, just a mask.

>>11221857
Based

[Anonymous No.11221961]

>This rainbow-colored map shows underground water ice on Mars. Cool colors are closer to the surface than warm colors; black zones indicate areas where a spacecraft would sink into fine dust; the outlined box represents the ideal region to send astronauts for them to dig up water ice.
>black zones indicate areas where a spacecraft would sink into fine dust
Wait, they're saying that a third of Mars is quicksand?

[Anonymous No.11222034]

>>11221961
So if one would shovel away the dirt on the martian poles, it would look like Duna?

[Anonymous No.11222036]

>>11217677

[Anonymous No.11222059]

>>11217677
What would happen if we sent a few thousand ATLAS units to begin mining operations on the moon?
Would it be feasible to launch within a decade? Would the combined weight be easier using nuclear ORION rocket propulsion?

[Anonymous No.11222063]

>>11221636
good
people who believe Mars can be terraformed with just throwing a bit of coal on it's poles are unbelievable dumb and there hopes should be shattered.
if a planets looses it's atmosphäre and water to space, then obviously those have to be trucked back in

[Anonymous No.11222072]

>>11222059
What would they even be mining for? Helium 3 is a meme btw.

[Anonymous No.11222081]

>>11222063
Mars can be sectionally inhabited by commensing a large scale mining operation using robots for power sources.
After that it just becomes a task of setting up dome cities and undergrounds.

However, if you REALLY want you could harness an asteroid or a few and divert them to a planet to revive the core through a hail storm of them or just say "fuck it" and crash a planet into them.

[Anonymous No.11222096]

>>11222072
water ice, you're going to need it if you want to make lunar ops more affordable

[Anonymous No.11222100]

>>11222059
>what would happen
YOU WOULD SUCCEED DUMBASS
THE ONLY REASON NOT TO DO THIS IS BECAUSE THIS WORLD IS TOO STUPID TO HANDLE THIS. CAN YOU IMAGINE?! A BUNCH OF MUH JESUS LARPERS SPREADING CHRISTIANITY THROUGHOUT SPACE?! FUCK YOU. FUCK YOU AND YOUR LITTLE "GENIUS" IDEAS. YOUR OPTIMISM WILL KILL US ALL.

[Anonymous No.11222102]

>>11222100
>YOUR OPTIMISM WILL KILL US ALL.
*pic related*

[Anonymous No.11222188]

>https://satnogs.org/
>open source ground stations to spy on satellite signals
what do we think of this?

[Anonymous No.11222298]

>>11222100
of all the fucking things you could have possibly chosen to sperg about it was christfags? really?

[Anonymous No.11222332]

>>11222188
>nogs
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.11222778]

>>11221386
It has the eerie feeling of reoccurring news about the war between Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia.

[Anonymous No.11223039]

>>11222081
>reviving the core of an entire fucking planet instead of just setting up an artificial magnetic field

[Anonymous No.11223041]

>>11223039
if you're not willing to melt an entire planet then can you really claim you love her

[Anonymous No.11223066]

>>11223041
fair point

[Anonymous No.11223318]

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7SoFR4Y7oo

Lots of implications without naming names.

[Anonymous No.11223358]

>>11219195
>Sowers
Isn't that also the guy who made the scientific paper that btfos rocket reusability?

[Anonymous No.11223396]

>>11223358
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37390.0

It doesn't make sense for ULA who is riding the gov contract dick and charging arm/leg of NASA. They only fly handful a year and will most likely be curbed in the coming decade. But for SpaceX, its absolutely a revolution.

[Anonymous No.11223454]

>>11221636
For the water issue, couldn't you just bring water in from Titan and/or Ceres?

[Anonymous No.11223487]

>>11221636
For the water issue, couldn't you just bring water in from Europa and/or Ceres?

As for the greenhouse effect, we managed to fuck up our atmosphere from CO2s in just a few short years relatively (just a few generations). Assuming there's a similar output of CO2s in a similar timespan, would that establish an effective greenhouse effect?

[Anonymous No.11223503]

>>11223487
The CO2 we've dumped into our atmosphere has taken something like 100-150 years to get to where it is, and that is with the entire weight of human civilization behind it.

Doing it deliberately on another planet with a couple dozen at most? Have fun with that.
Venting Mars' polar CO2 reserves is going to require multiple asteroid/comet impacts at each ice cap to release it all. I'm not even sure if that is enough to start a greenhouse effect strong enough to initiate melting of global subsurface ices.

[Anonymous No.11223532]

>>11223503
Isn't the 'plan' to create huge solar mirrors to heat up the ice caps, which would probably be easier? And of course it wouldn't make a huge difference at first, but as more and more people settle there, more infrastructure is built, necessitating the need for more CO2-emission based transportation, it wouldn't be that unreasonable to say it'd take maybe 200 years or so, which wouldn't be too bad in the long-run.

[Anonymous No.11223546]

>>11223532
The problem with that then lies: Where are you going to get all of the oxygen? Here on earth, there's a shitload of oxygen in the atmosphere which can be used to burn shit. On Mars, most of the Oxygen is locked up in the form of CO2 or in the crust of the planet. There is very little free oxygen available.
Even if you went with methane for the ghg, you'd still need an absolute metric fuckton of energy and mass to generate the volumes of gas needed to get a decent greenhouse effect going.

[Anonymous No.11223561]

>>11223546
That's where the water from Europa, Ceres, and Mars comes in right? Not to mention maybe large-scale ISRUs.

[Anonymous No.11223585]

>>11223561
You still have to split it into hydrogen and oxygen, and that requires a considerable amount of energy to do it at any respectable rate. Now add in the intent to engineer Mars' atmosphere, and the energy requirements become colossal.
I'm not against terraforming Mars, but just changing the atmosphere alone is going to require a fuckload of energy and resources.
For the amount of energy we'd burn trying to terraform Mars, we could build pressure domes all over the planet AND get a supermagnet-driven magnetosphere shield set up at Sol-Mars L1 and colonize Mars that way.

[Anonymous No.11223602]

>>11223585
Why not just do something about the soil and plant a Shitton of plants? Also, why not terraform at the same time as paraterraforming?

[Anonymous No.11223632]

>>11223602
Fixing the soil would arguably require even more energy than reprocessing the atmosphere. The question also remains of what the fuck you are going to do with all of the perchlorate once done?
The problem with terraforming Mars boils down to a lack of energy to pull it off, and the fact its going to take centuries if not millennia to do.

[Anonymous No.11223705]

>>11223532
>CO2-emission based transportation
>On fucking mars
>With no available O2 and no easy accessible fossil fuels

You are retarded

[Anonymous No.11223711]

>>11223705
>emit CO2s to build up the greenhouse effect
>transport gasoline to Mars via rockets
Retard

[Anonymous No.11223715]

>>11223711
gasoline is composed of carbon and hydrogen
where does the oxygen come from to turn that gasoline into CO2?

[Anonymous No.11223803]

>>11223711
>Transport gasoline to Mars

You are confirmed retard

[Anonymous No.11224278]

I want to get off Mr. Musk's Wild Ride.

[Anonymous No.11224298]

Space is fake.

[Anonymous No.11224299]

>>11217677

[Anonymous No.11224352]

>>11224278
I see you expanse crossboard poster.

Drummer best girl.

[Anonymous No.11224358]

>>11224352
That goes without saying.

[Anonymous No.11224382]

Who thinks gif related is CGI?

[Anonymous No.11224389]

>>11224382
No, but why would it be CGI?

[Anonymous No.11224393]

>>11224389
Due to space being fake. What makes you so sure it isn't CGI?

[Anonymous No.11224399]

>>11224393
>Due to space being fake.
No. Space is real.

>What makes you so sure it isn't CGI?
Because there's no need to do so. Space IS real, and SpaceX offers a legitimate service, so it wouldn't be hard for them to slap a camera on one of their rockets for some neat publicity shots.

[Anonymous No.11224406]

>>11224399
>No. Space is real.
Have you been to it?
>>11224399
>Because there's no need to do so. Space IS real, and SpaceX offers a legitimate service, so it wouldn't be hard for them to slap a camera on one of their rockets for some neat publicity shots.
Yeah, but the "ice" falling off looks fake as fuck. It's oddly shaped and at parts weirdly resembles dragon wings, which his rocket is named after.

[Anonymous No.11224421]

>>11224298
>HUH LOOK THAT DEBRIS SORTA LOOKS LIKE 'LIE' IF I THINK IT SAYS IT! GUESS SPACE A FREE MASON LIE!

[Anonymous No.11224422]

>>11217677

[Anonymous No.11224425]

>>11224406
Flat earth and fake space are psyops to make people like those who don't follow the official Holocaust narrative look crazy. It's not illegal to deny space, but it's illegal to deny the Holocaust!

[Anonymous No.11224433]

>>11224421
>HUH LOOK THAT "DEBRIS", LOOKS TOTALLY LEGIT, NOTHING TO SEE HERE...

[Anonymous No.11224437]

>>11224425
Makes no sense since Holocaust deniers already look crazy without flat earth/fake space. You also ignored my questions.

[Anonymous No.11224439]

>>11224406
>Have you been to it?
not him but how do you know it's fake? have you been up there to check?
>Yeah, but the "ice" falling off looks fake as fuck. It's oddly shaped and at parts weirdly resembles dragon wings
what should it look like?

[Anonymous No.11224441]

>>11224298
>>11224382
It's just ice

[Anonymous No.11224442]

>>11224406
>Have you been to it?
No, but I don't need to have gone to space to know that it's real.

There are in NASA alone, thousands of highly skilled engineers that it has hired for the decades, and yet not one of them spills the secret. What about Apollo which as literal days of recorded dialog during every mission, and yet no error has be found. Technical papers and physical equipment that has been used to go to space all publicly available, and yet no one has found any issue with them.

And that's just NASA, there are other space agencies, both public and private, that has shown space in a manner that is consistent with no only what NASA has shown but also with each other. Especially the Soviet Union's space program, which if space were fake could've easily exposed the US "fake" space program, and vise versa with the US exposing the USSR.

And then there are private companies who offer space based services, such as; satellite tv, weather tracking, communications, atmospheric study, and much more. And yet none of them notice anything suspicious happening with their every expensive payloads.

Such a conspiracy big enough to cover just what I mentioned would need to be so large and have been running for so long that it should've been compromised and exposed in some way a long time ago.

And that's not even getting int the science and observations that predict that space exists. Such as the observation that air get's thinner with increasing altitude, implying that a sufficiently high altitude the air would be so thin that it would practically be a vacuum. Such as the principles of gravity and angular momentum describing orbits in a manner that perfectly matches what is currently being done in space.

There is so much evidence for space being a real thing that anyone who denies it is practicing willful ignorance.

>It's oddly shaped and at parts weirdly resembles dragon wings, which his rocket is named after.
Yes, falcon is a well known type of dragon.

[Anonymous No.11224449]

>>11224439
>not him but how do you know it's fake? have you been up there to check?
Vacuum of space next to pressurised gas (earth's atmosphere) without a solid barrier is a violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
>what should it look like?
Not fake.

[Anonymous No.11224453]

>>11224441
I know what it's supposed to be, it looks fake as fuck.

[Anonymous No.11224457]

>>11224449
>Vacuum of space next to pressurised gas (earth's atmosphere) without a solid barrier is a violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Unless there is some force being applied to the gas such that clumping as close to the source of said force as possible would be a lower energy state than floating freely in space. Gravity.

[Anonymous No.11224459]

>>11224453
Your posts look fake as fuck, prove me wrong otherwise I won't believe a word you say.

[Anonymous No.11224465]

>>11224449
>Vacuum of space next to pressurised gas (earth's atmosphere) without a solid barrier is a violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
the atmospheric pressure gets lower and lower the higher you get does it not?
eventually it gets to zero.
how exactly does it violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. i'd like you to explain it for me.
>Not fake.
what does "not fake" look like?

[Anonymous No.11224466]

>>11224442
The conspiracy of faking space by all these people isn't being done necessarily out of malice, it's just to maintain social order.

They only found out space was fake once rockets went high enough to hit the barrier (Operation Fishbowl). If they told everyone the truth, they'd lose control.

>Yes, falcon is a well known type of dragon.
Musk likes dragons: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/989198118666162176?lang=en

[Anonymous No.11224469]

>>11224457
Gravity isn't a force.

[Anonymous No.11224471]

>>11224459
Nice deflection.

[Anonymous No.11224472]

>>11224453

[Anonymous No.11224474]

>>11224471
Sounds like exactly the kind of thing a fake bot would post, trying to deflect from the fact that its posts are fake as fuck. I won't expound or justify why I'm claiming your posts are fake as fuck, they just kinda look that way so they are.

[Anonymous No.11224475]

stop giving it (You)s

[Anonymous No.11224478]

>>11224465
>the atmospheric pressure gets lower and lower the higher you get does it not?
>eventually it gets to zero.
>how exactly does it violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. i'd like you to explain it for me.
Gas pressure requires a container. Without a container (like the globe earth), the gas pressure will equilibrate with the surrounding area.

[Anonymous No.11224482]

>>11224466
>The conspiracy of faking space by all these people isn't being done necessarily out of malice, it's just to maintain social order.
Yes, the social order of the United States being gripped in a panic after Sputnik. You're also ignoring the physics behind spaceflight being valid, and private individuals who might not care much for "social order", and the Cold War, and the technology, and the fact that the conspiracy would've been exposed a long time ago.

>They only found out space was fake once rockets went high enough to hit the barrier (Operation Fishbowl).
No. Operation Fishbowl was a test of the effects nuclear weapons on Earth's magnetic field in space.

>Musk likes dragons
And you're completely sidestepping the fact that you think some ice is face because it resembled a dragon and that SpaceX has a rocket named dragon. Despite SpaceX having no such rockets named that.

And also, even if your connection is valid. How could a conspiracy survive if it's conspirators are putting in little "hints" like that? It wouldn't. You're being obtuse, stop that.

[Anonymous No.11224483]

>>11224472
>thinks it looks real
>>11224474
So what if my posts look fake as fuck, what about the gif? You think that looks real?

[Anonymous No.11224485]

>>11224483
I don't know man, your posts are just off, they look fake as fuck sorry but you must be a bot.

[Anonymous No.11224502]

>>11224482
>Yes, the social order of the United States being gripped in a panic after Sputnik. You're also ignoring the physics behind spaceflight being valid, and private individuals who might not care much for "social order", and the Cold War, and the technology, and the fact that the conspiracy would've been exposed a long time ago.
Oh yes, because the Cold War era was totally trustworthy and not theatre.
>No. Operation Fishbowl was a test of the effects nuclear weapons on Earth's magnetic field in space.
That's the cover explanation - it's not called Operation Fishbowl for nothing...
>And you're completely sidestepping the fact that you think some ice is face because it resembled a dragon and that SpaceX has a rocket named dragon. Despite SpaceX having no such rockets named that.
SpaceX have a spacecraft named dragon. Are you denying the ice resembles dragon wings?
>And also, even if your connection is valid. How could a conspiracy survive if it's conspirators are putting in little "hints" like that? It wouldn't. You're being obtuse, stop that.
Because they use their symbology like an artist uses their signature on a painting. They likely get a kick out of people finding the "hints", but they know there'll always be enough people like you who will ignore them so it's not a problem.

[Anonymous No.11224508]

>>11224485
You're doing an incredible job of defending your boy Musk. Oh wait, you can't even bare to watch the gif.

[Anonymous No.11224523]

Engine serial number 17, apparently.

[Anonymous No.11224527]

>>11224523
Is Santa looking to upgrade his rig with that?

[Anonymous No.11224562]

>>11224523
why is Raptor so stupidly complicated

[Anonymous No.11224568]

>>11217677

[Anonymous No.11224583]

>>11224562
For one, most of the smaller pipes and wires are sensor-related and not integral to the engine's function. Two, FFSC is goddamn complicated.

[Anonymous No.11224585]

>>11224562
The plumbing complexity is in direct proportion to the functions of the engine. Each turbopump needs an inlet for fuel or oxidizer to drive the pumps, methane has to flow through the engine bell and combustion chamber to keep the engine at an operational temperature and then dump it back into the combustion chamber, the whole thing has to run at very high pressure (over 800 bar at the pumps), and it needs various check valves and sensors to make sure everything keeps running - not to mention igniters and a gajillion other things I've left out. tl;dr, a complex engine cycle requires more parts.

[Anonymous No.11224588]

is anybody going to report this discord advertisement spammer?

[Anonymous No.11224605]

>>11224393
Better go tell all of the thousands of organisations that have satellites in space, then.

[Anonymous No.11224619]

>>11224562
Lumberjacks

[Anonymous No.11224622]

based Nomadd

[Anonymous No.11224639]

>>11224605
You mean satellites on weather balloons?

[Anonymous No.11224644]

>>11224639
Alright, humor me for a bit. Since space isn't real, why does the air get colder and thinner the higher up you go?

[Anonymous No.11224658]

>>11224644
Due to the equilibration of different densities of gases in the atmosphere (buoyancy and density).

[Anonymous No.11224661]

>>11224588
I was reporting the discord tranny for at least half an hour, even refreshing page 1 to find more to report. Mods were asleep.

[Anonymous No.11224665]

>>11224658
That explains why it gets thinner, but not why there's a difference in temperature. Where does the heat go?

[Anonymous No.11224676]

>>11224665
Less dense gases aren't capable of retaining heat from the sun as much as denser gases.

[Anonymous No.11224678]

>>11224676
You just said space doesn't exist. Why is the sun making the Earth so warm, and not the... "atmosphere" around it?

[Anonymous No.11224686]

>>11224678
What does space not existing have to do with it? The earth is warmer due to being denser, therefore capable of retaining more heat for longer, compared to the atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.11224691]

>>11224686
The ground is frequently colder than the air.

[Anonymous No.11224702]

>>11224352
>drummer
that's not how you spell bobbie

[Anonymous No.11224704]

>>11224691
Depends on the conditions. What are you trying to prove?

[Anonymous No.11224706]

>>11224406
Have you ever been to Belgium? Prove to me that Belgium exists.

[Anonymous No.11224707]

>>11224704
I'm not trying to prove anything. Mostly just wondering how much effort you're willing to put into this nonsense.

[Anonymous No.11224709]

>>11224706
Is it reasonably easy for you to visit Belgium if you wanted to, to prove it exists? Can the same be said for space?

[Anonymous No.11224710]

>>11224478
then why is the pressure higher at sea level than it is at higher altitudes?
if there was a "container" then why isn't the air pressure the same at all altitudes?

[Anonymous No.11224711]

>>11224709
Yes, unless you're one of those kooks who think a digital camera "can't be trusted". It's literally a couple thousand dollars to yeet a camera above the karman line.

[Anonymous No.11224713]

>>11224707
I've put more effort into challenging the mainstream conception of space than you have. That's what real scientists do.

[Anonymous No.11224715]

>>11224710
>then why is the pressure higher at sea level than it is at higher altitudes?
>if there was a "container" then why isn't the air pressure the same at all altitudes?
Because of the different densities of gases that equilibrate into a natural order of density/pressure.

[Anonymous No.11224716]

>>11224713
Building up confirmation biases for your preconceived notions is what a crackpot does.

[Anonymous No.11224719]

>>11224711
Are you a digital camera?

[Anonymous No.11224723]

>>11224716
If I'm wrong, it's only going to get worse for me. I'm a chad who takes risks and thinks for themselves, you are a virgin who plays it safe and lets other people think for you.

[Anonymous No.11224740]

Just ignore the flat earther, goddamn.

[Anonymous No.11224745]

>>11224719
Yes. Prove I'm not.

[Anonymous No.11224752]

>>11224740
This, they stop if nobody talks to them.

[Anonymous No.11224839]

Hey Mods, clean up the flat earth fags.

Do you job, you do it for free.

[Anonymous No.11225037]

The best reason for lowering launch costs, is so that we can finally launch the flat earthers on a one way trip to i don't fucking care where

[Anonymous No.11225287]

If common people can't even go to space how do we know space is real?

[Anonymous No.11225290]

>>11224839
hey mods ban the sexual imagery and other roastie posts, make this a whole board of knowledge

[Anonymous No.11225292]

>>11225037
I vote to the moon.

[Anonymous No.11225293]

>>11225290
wholesome*

[Anonymous No.11225296]

>>11225287
How do you know antarctica is real?
How do you know the pope's bedroom is real?

[Anonymous No.11225305]

>>11225296
>How do you know the pope's bedroom is real?
I'd rather not talk about it.

[Anonymous No.11225310]

>>11224839
They're busy with their required daily 23 hour nap. Modding is hard work you know?

[Anonymous No.11225315]

>>11225296
Antarctica as a continent isn't real - it's a wall patrolled by the United Nations

[Anonymous No.11225344]

>>11223715
The metric shittons of water on Mars? Also I think there was something in the soil itself that could be used for oxygen.

[Anonymous No.11225347]

>>11225315
>it's a (((wall))) patrolled by the United Nations
How do you know?

[Anonymous No.11225349]

>>11225347
Just google Antarctica ice wall. There are tons of imagery. You DO know how to use google, right?

[Anonymous No.11225352]

>>11225349
How do you know that it's an ice wall if you've never seen it yourself?

[Anonymous No.11225358]

>>11225349
I just googled it and all reputable sources say its complete bullshit. there are a few lizardpeople-type conspiracy sites that use unsourced schizo rants and pictures of ice shelves as "proof", is that all you've got?

[Anonymous No.11225363]

>>11225358
Your "reputable" sources are funded by the big science cabal.

[Anonymous No.11225373]

>>11225363
For what purpose? Because Earth is flat?
How can there be an ice wall surrounding the "flat earth" if there is not a single fact that supports the theory of a flat earth while everything points towards an oblate spheroid earth?
I'm absolutely baffled how even the biggest retards can fall for this meme

[Anonymous No.11225382]

>>11225373
The fact that globeheads had to invent obtuse terms like "oblate spheroid" to deflect people pointing out errors in their model is itself a huge piece of evidence that the whole globe earth charade is a complete farce.

[Anonymous No.11225386]

I remember my time in the army, when i was patrolling my countries section of the giant ice wall. every flat earther who we could find trespassing, we just threw over the edge.
best time of my life

[Anonymous No.11225392]

>>11225386
We're documenting your crimes against humanity and truth. Your days are numbered.

[Anonymous No.11225394]

>>11225373
>How can there be an ice wall surrounding the "flat earth" if there is not a single fact that supports the theory of a flat earth while everything points towards an oblate spheroid earth?
Because flatties are incredibly stupid, and willingly so. To them, it's completely acceptable to reject observations that falsify their outdated beliefs simply because it goes against their beliefs.

And for why specifically an ice wall? Because the most common flat earth "map" is an azimuthal projection of the globe that's centered on the north pole. In that map the south pole is smeared along the circumference. They conclude that the south pole must be an ice wall. All while ignoring the irony of their ''discovery".

[Anonymous No.11225399]

>>>/feg/

[Anonymous No.11225416]

What the fuck did you cunts do to this thread?

[Anonymous No.11225418]

>>11225416
Mods are letting trolls run amok because it makes the board more active.

[Anonymous No.11225420]

>>11225418
Hiroshimoot was a mistake

[Anonymous No.11225440]

>>11225418
took them like an hour to notice tranny pol-discord spam that was being actively reported

[Anonymous No.11225540]

>>11224562
Considering it's fuel cycle it's actually quite conservative, "naked" it pretty much the two turbopumps, powerhead, and a bundle of smaller plumbing, probably to keep the mix as clean as possible and to move around helium pressurant.

[Anonymous No.11225549]

>>11225540
no helium, it spins up on tank pressures or stored high pressure gaseous propellants

[Anonymous No.11225553]

>>11225549

[Anonymous No.11225557]

>>11225553
Elisei Maslov is wrong, anon

[Anonymous No.11225563]

>>11225557
Huh, so presumably then those lines for helium and nitrogen are just using methane from the autogenous system? Is there a more up to date graphic somewhere?

[Anonymous No.11225564]

>>11225540
>helium pressurant.

No helium in a Raptor.

[Anonymous No.11225569]

>>11225540
Why are rocket engines so sexy

[Anonymous No.11225575]

>>11225569
Forbidden fleshlight

[Anonymous No.11225581]

>>11225569
At least in my opinion things are beautiful when their form reflects their purpose in an almost perfect way. Rocket and jet engines and other high end pieces of technology have a beautiful aesthetic because they are pure function, every part is doing something necessary, nothing is superfluous, a function for every part and every part in it's proper place. It's only going to get better as computer design improves, algorithms can be trained to be even more autistic than engineers.

[Anonymous No.11225583]

>>11225563
nobody fucking knows, but I like livingjw's diagrams

[Anonymous No.11225627]

i thought december was supposed to be popping with tons of launches, but there's only been a handful. is the industry still in a slump?

[Anonymous No.11225637]

https://spacenews.com/northrop-grumman-wins-competition-to-build-future-icbm-by-default/

Northrop Grumman wins competition to build future ICBM, by default:

>The U.S. Air Force confirmed Dec. 13 that Northrop Grumman is the only bidder for the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent program to develop a new intercontinental ballistic missile.

>The Air Force only received one proposal in response to a solicitation for “GBSD engineering and manufacturing development and early production and deployment,” Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek said in a statement. “The Air Force will proceed with an aggressive and effective sole-source negotiation. We remain on track for a contract award in the fourth quarter of Fiscal Year 2020.”

>The GBSD is an estimated $63 billion 20-year program to replace more than 400 aging Minuteman 3 intercontinental ballistic missiles. It was expected to be a two-horse race between Northrop Grumman and Boeing. But Boeing decided to drop out after it concluded that Northrop Grumman’s grip on the solid rocket motors market would give it an overwhelming pricing advantage it could not compete against.

>“Boeing is disappointed we were unable to submit a bid to the GBSD solicitation,” the company said in a statement Dec. 13.

>Boeing had unsuccessfully pleaded with the Air Force to compel Northrop Grumman to form a “national team” and include Boeing it its bid. In the Dec. 13 statement, Boeing said it “continues to support a change in acquisition strategy that would bring the best of industry to this national priority.”

I wonder if Northrop will use the same SRBs for GBSD as they are using for OmegA...

[Anonymous No.11225644]

>>11224839
Mods, KILL HIM
>>11225349
I thought pictures of space were fake? But now google is good for images of your stupid ice wall? Yeah, GTFO psyopkike, your purpose of making us holocaust revisionists look stupid are falling apart.

[Anonymous No.11225651]

>>11225637
I really would like to see a bunch of companies shitting out ICBMs, I want to see a lineup of Northrop, Cockheed, Boeing, Blue Origin, SpaceX, Etc... ICBMs all rolled out for test firing.

[Anonymous No.11225656]

>>11225382
>uses big fancy diction to make himself look smart
>falls for a joke reply about the ice wall army
Flat earthers, you're not even doing your jobs as psyops right! Why did the JIDF ever hire you?

[Anonymous No.11225662]

>>11224437
You morons were designed to make us look falsifiable. Unlike you, we can actually do math, which successfully debunks at least the ovens and 6 million.
>>11224382
If I were in the CGI direction, I'd probably not do the ice part, expensive as shit.

[Anonymous No.11225694]

>>11224382
I've done 3d modelling and animation for almost 10 years now, I can pick out poly's in even the best models and lighting errors from the best raytracers, and I'm 100% certain that is not CGI.

[Anonymous No.11225701]

>>11225564
>>11225563
>>11225557
>>11225553
>>11225549
Early versions use helium, later versions will not use helium.

[Anonymous No.11225790]

>>11225627
Looks like a slump to me.
Starlink may literally be THE reason that launches will have a significant increase next year.

[Anonymous No.11225898]

Will Europe ever get it shit together?

[Anonymous No.11225899]

>looking at lunar missions
>most die quickly because of the 2 week long periods of darkness
how are landers/rovers supposed to survive lunar nights without nuclear heaters?

[Anonymous No.11225938]

>>11225898
Did Greece?

[Anonymous No.11225968]

>>11225637
are the OmegA SRBs storeable?

[Anonymous No.11225970]

>>11225898
I mean Europe is literally just Arianespace right now and their GTO-launches count for double as well...

[Anonymous No.11225982]

>>11225899
They don't. A lot of the early lenders was not supposed to survive lunar night.
Lunokhods used polonium-210 radioactive heat source.
I'm not familiar with chinese landers, but they definitely use some kind of nuclear heater because second of them is still alive.

[Anonymous No.11225987]

>>11225898
Ariane6 will make it happen, bruh.
Korou, July - 2020 test launch.

I have my part of design in there as well. I can't wait to see it finally happen.

[Anonymous No.11225992]

>>11225898
Well, it not accounting European Soyuz. Just like Electron counted as US launch vehicle despite it launched from NZ.
So technically it should be 3 extra launches for Europe.

[Anonymous No.11226016]

>>11225982
>but they definitely use some kind of nuclear heater because second of them is still alive.

Both Chang’E 3 and 4 are still alive (they both use RTGs for power), Yutu can’t move due to technical issues and Yutu 2 is functioning perfectly fine (they are just powered by batteries and solar panels and therefore, have to shut themselves down for each lunar night and restart to wake up after it’s passed).

>>11225987
Arianespace apparently has a completely full manifest for 2021-22, to the point that their not even competing for contracts scheduled to launch over this period. Don’t think it’s because of the A6 though...

[Anonymous No.11226088]

>>11226016
So solar + battery is a viable option as long as you power down every two weeks? Weird.

[Anonymous No.11226117]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LlsZysPeidI

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2218048-exclusive-rocket-test-in-alaska-polluted-230-tonnes-of-soil/

Remember that secretive rocket startup (Astra) that Hullo man made a video about? They’ve got a new rocket and it’s bigger...

[Anonymous No.11226128]

>>11226117
what's so special about them anyway?

[Anonymous No.11226178]

>>11226128
Hullo man likes them

[Anonymous No.11226211]

>>11225898
>only 6 for India
>each launch looks like this

[Anonymous No.11226237]

Starship is supposed to be super cheap access to space right? But that's years down the road. Do we know how much it will cost for the first few years?

[Anonymous No.11226297]

>>11226237
Under $100M per launch - $50M per launch.

[Anonymous No.11226342]

>>11226117
>video thumbnail
damn, Electron is that much smaller than New Shepard?

[Anonymous No.11226358]

>>11226211
Despite India's amount of poo, it does have remarkable people.

[Anonymous No.11226623]

>>11226211
>POO IN ORBIT

[Anonymous No.11226838]

>>11226623
Someone is jealous of their own insecurity

[Anonymous No.11226897]

my roommate moved out and now I have lots of extra room. Any cool space posters or whatnot?

[Anonymous No.11226919]

>>11226211
So why did they do this?

[Anonymous No.11227102]

How far will space flight most likely advance over the next 50 years?
How hard is finding jobs in this field, especially as a kraut?

[Anonymous No.11227389]

>>11221786
he is going through his asian gf phase anon. Accept it

[Anonymous No.11227413]

sfg is slow the last couple days

[Anonymous No.11227419]

>>11227413
waiting for launches

[Anonymous No.11227429]

>>11226919
Launching planet inc's earth imaging dove satellites

[Anonymous No.11227740]

>>11227102
Fix EU first maybe? When's the last time EU made significant scientific advances?

[Anonymous No.11227863]

>>11226211
>designated shitting orbits

[Anonymous No.11228090]

>>11227102
The moon will be colonized by then, with science bases on mars and titan. Hopefully

[Anonymous No.11228138]

>>11227413
The only news lately is the BE-3U did a very short test burn.
https://youtu.be/HRiAEPpQzT0

[Anonymous No.11228439]

Feels good knowing that the cretins who spent days and weeks over the past year following starship "progress" were just wasting their time :^)

[Anonymous No.11228449]

>>11226117
>But New Scientist has learned that the rockets did take off — before malfunctioning and damaging the spaceport. Remediation work has included sending more than 200 tonnes of soil for decontamination.
What? Does this mean that the Astra rocket is using hypergolics? Or is it's payload something toxic? Or are they being overactive?

[Anonymous No.11228453]

>>11226211
All the poo there makes methane fuel very cheap there

[Anonymous No.11228520]

>>11228449
https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau/astra.htm

>Astra is a small satellite launch vehicle designed by Astra Space Inc, formerly known as Ventions Inc. Reportedly this is a small orbital launch vehicle capable of delivering about 100 kg to low earth orbit.

>This vehicle likely builds on the experience gained by developing the air-launched SALVO launch vehicle, although it did not perform any launches. It is fueled by Kerosene and liquid oxygen (LOX). The first stage of Astra is powered by five engines driven by battery-powered pumps.

>The rocket was spotted on a video in February 2018 apparently doing ground tests at Alameda Naval Air Station.

>The company is the customer for a secretive "Rocket 1" suborbital launch at Pacific Spaceport Complex Alaska (PSCA) on Kodiak Island in 2018. The first suborbital testflight occured on 21 July 2018 with failure shortly after launch.

>The second flight in November 2018 also failed shortly after launch and fell near the launch pad, after all five engines failed.

[Anonymous No.11228592]

>>11228520
so how would they contaminate anything? Even if they used ancient NiCd batteries this shouldn't be a problem

[Anonymous No.11228648]

>>11228592
>so how would they contaminate anything?

Just debris likely, it’s jargon and doesn’t necessarily mean harmful chemicals are involved.

[Anonymous No.11228727]

>>11228520
>100kg to leo
what is even the fucking point of things like this anymore?
Is everyone just in so deep they cant back out when it comes to launch systems they cant back out and have to rely on daddy gubmint

[Anonymous No.11228734]

>>11228727
The size of satellite payloads has been shrinking for a while. 100 kilos does quite a bit for you these days in terms of optical sensor packages.

[Anonymous No.11228739]

>>11228727
>what is even the fucking point of things like this anymore?

There’s obviously a market for small sat launchers, Electron can only do 250kg to LEO, but Rocket Lab have a good thing going. They just opened a new US launch site specifically for government/military launches. The real question is how many small sat launchers can the industry and government demand support.

[Anonymous No.11228740]

>>11228727
>Is everyone just in so deep they cant back out when it comes to launch systems they cant back out and have to rely on daddy gubmint
I'm not even sure what you're complaining about.

[Anonymous No.11228743]

>>11228734
anon, yeet
alternatively,
>but muh tonnage
alternatively,
does going small even save you any money in the long run?

[Anonymous No.11228747]

>>11228439
Still relatively little to the time spent on SLS.

[Anonymous No.11228753]

>>11228743
>does going small even save you any money in the long run?

It really depends on what capabilities you're working with. Satellite agricultural survey data certainly sells, and you don't need a 20,000 kilo telescope to get that information in decent, useful quality and resolution.

[Anonymous No.11228771]

>>11228753
I meant for launch vehicles

[Anonymous No.11228794]

>>11228771
Volume of launch saves more money than anything else. Falcon 9 is partly cheap because the engines cost about $100,000 each, versus SLS' $25+ million a piece RS-25s.

[Anonymous No.11228812]

>>11228794
>Falcon 9 is partly cheap because the engines cost about $100,000 each, versus SLS' $25+ million a piece RS-25s.

What does any of this have to do with small satellite launchers? Also, Merlins cost around a million a piece, but no specific number has been given.

[Anonymous No.11228819]

>>11228812
Merlins are cheaper than that. There are a lot more people launching small payloads, and small sats can book a small launcher to give them the specific orbit at a time table they get to determine, instead of ridesharing on someone else who has obligations to other customers at dates you do not control. If those small customers care about time, the small launcher makes sense.

[Anonymous No.11228849]

>>11228740
Im just annoyed that people aren't in all markets trying to put people into space and are developing things whos entire life exists only to saturate the earthern market.

These retards seem to think we will only live and die on this world and don't think at all about the future lunarians.

[Anonymous No.11228860]

Could we make a particle beam accelerator to help boost payloads into orbit? Particle beam hits and vaporizes a block of light solid material and accelerate it up a vacuum launcher like an externally supplied solid plasma engine, or is it too expensive and convoluted?

[Anonymous No.11228861]

>>11228860
if you're going to build a megastructure, my favorite is the launch loop

[Anonymous No.11228878]

>>11228861
building and maintaining them, especially on the equator during hurricane season is a huge pain in the ass, logistically

[Anonymous No.11228894]

>>11227413
>>11227419

December still has some nice things in store.

[Anonymous No.11228899]

>>11228878
do it across the Sahara, see how long it takes people to notice
also the equator itself never sees hurricanes

[Anonymous No.11228968]

SpaceX Youtube changed their placeholder thumbnail, and now it looks kinda uncanny
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbXgZg9JmkI

[Anonymous No.11229109]

>>11228894
Rokot getting retired? I wonder why all this conversion of ICBMs into space launchers didn't work for Russia.
I remember back in the day they was launching satellites into space from a submarines.

[Anonymous No.11229209]

>>11229109
>Rokot getting retired? I wonder why all this conversion of ICBMs into space launchers didn't work for Russia.

Because most of them are partly made of Ukrainian parts. Rokot is being retired for the same reason Dnepr is no longer launched and why Zenit is being replaced by the Soyuz-5. For example, Zenit’s RD-171 engine has a Ukrainian-made turbo pump amongst other things. Therefore, Soyuz-5 will replace the original RD-171 with the new RD-171MV engine, an upgraded version using 100% Russian parts. Rokot has a Ukrainian-sourced G&C suite, it’ll be replaced by a homogeneous version:

>The Rokot version with a Ukrainian control system will stop flying after 2019, due to Ukraine's ban on technology exports to Russia. A full Russian-made Rokot-2 light carrier rocket may begin again in 2021.

[Anonymous No.11229235]

>>11221200
yep! Sea Dragon is fuckhuge. Those are the mighty F-1 engines on the sides, the first stage engines of the Saturn V, being used as vernier thrusters for steering!

[Anonymous No.11229253]

>>11225987
this. Switching from Ariane 5 to 6 will double the European launch rate (single manifest launches instead of dual) and replace Soyuz.

>I have part of my design in there as well
congrats! I really admire the European engineering ethic.

[Anonymous No.11229259]

>>11229235
Those aren't F-1 engines, they're pressure-fed engines the size of F-1 engines, being used as vernier thrusters. If Sea Dragon used F-1 engines it'd be too expensive to be worth it.

[Anonymous No.11229260]

>>11226342
Electron is currently the smallest active orbital vehicle, even shorter than Pegasus.

[Anonymous No.11229323]

>>11227413
Weeks*
The death of Starship MK 1 significantly slowed these threads after we got done talking about it.

[Anonymous No.11229364]

>>11229259
Speaking of F-1, is it possible to make an engine of that size that's more "advanced"? With a closed cycle and much higher chamber pressure? Will we ever see 30+ MN single chamber engines?

[Anonymous No.11229369]

>>11229364
the best possible biprop engine will always be roughly the same size and shape as a Raptor unless materials wildly improve, in which case it might get a little bit bigger or smaller
the plumbing and powerhead changes shape and size depending on the propellants you choose

[Anonymous No.11229441]

>>11228968
gross

[Anonymous No.11229558]

[Anonymous No.11229712]

Australia's launch site
https://youtu.be/6o_R0r-AakY

[Anonymous No.11229718]

>>11229712
Do all Australians look like that?

[Anonymous No.11229721]

>>11229718
no I think he got left in the oven too long

[Anonymous No.11229733]

>>11229558
more like devolution

[Anonymous No.11229765]

>>11229558
>4/1700

[Anonymous No.11229768]

>>11229765
I wonder what part of the RS-25 really really doesn't like going to high throttle like that

[Anonymous No.11229848]

>>11229558
The genocide of reusable shuttle engines.

[Anonymous No.11230022]

>>11229765
>>11229768
>>11229848
The restart engines aren’t Shuttle-derived, their new . Also the lower number of restarts/shorter service life is because their designed to be expendable (they only need to be fired once).

[Anonymous No.11230098]

Two more BeiDou satellites just went up

[Anonymous No.11230103]

>>11229369
I don't get that, shouldn't a larger engine allow for higher chamber pressures? The biggest problem for larger engines was always combustion stability. Considering they managed to figure that out for the F1 in the 60s it stands to reason we could do it again for something else.

[Anonymous No.11230107]

>>11230022
so you're saying we should be happy about the RS-25 getting turned into a chinese clone of itself?

[Anonymous No.11230115]

Talking of the Chinese...here’s some cool footage of today’s LM-3 launch:

https://m.weibo.cn/status/Il437B073?jumpfrom=weibocom#&video

[Anonymous No.11230124]

>>11230115

[Anonymous No.11230126]

>>11230124

[Anonymous No.11230137]

>>11225694
What are typical lighting errors from ray tracing, anon?

[Anonymous No.11230212]

>>11227740
Wait a minute, what about the SABRE engine! Ah no, sorry EU, we're taking that with us when we leave heh

[Anonymous No.11230229]

>>11230212
>implying you have money to develop it further when NHS takes everything in the budget

Heh...

[Anonymous No.11230309]

The opposite is true, the larger the diameter the larger the surface area the more stress on the chamber for a given pressure.
When I was building solid motors years ago I ended up sticking with low diameter designs for the higher pressure they allow.

[Anonymous No.11230311]

>>11230309
meant to link >>11230103

[Anonymous No.11230317]

>>11230103
The only factor in how high your chamber pressure can get is how powerful your pump is. Going higher pressure to get a more powerful engine is better than going bigger, because it doesn't add as much mass per unit thrust, but it gets hard to work out the pump system.

[Anonymous No.11230371]

>>11230103
To pressurize an F1 chamber up to the same level as say an RD-180 or Raptor engine the turbomachinery would need to be gratuitously enormous. A larger powerhead and chamber allows for larger mass flow rates because you can fit in more injectors, but firstly it also represents a larger pressure vessel, that means more surface area in which a potential failure could occur and you should also consider that the internal volume of a combustion chamber doesn't scale linearly with it's diameter. For extreme simplicity's sake let's assume our powerhead and chamber are simple cylinder three feet tall and two feet wide, the internal volume that needs to be pressurized is only about .27m^3, if you double it's size however that volume becomes not .54m^3 but 2.135m^3, closer to ten times as much volume rather than twice as much. That means to get that volume to the same pressure, your turbopumps need to force much more propellant and oxidizer into the space, thus they must either operate at much, much higher speeds and thus be more heavily built, or be much larger, or both. Suddenly your TWR begins to diminish. Better to build a smaller, more robust combustion chamber if possible and avoid ballooning the engine's size any more than is absolutely necessary.

[Anonymous No.11230377]

>>11230126

[Anonymous No.11230416]

>>11230309
>>11230317
>>11230371
But since surface area scales quadratic and volume cubic isn't the increase in surface area irrelevant? Sure, if the pressures go up you will need more stable walls and plumbing but you can also invest more material since your engine is getting more powerful. And of course the pump/turbines would need t be stronger but isn't scaling pumps/turbines up something that's really easy? Just look at the F1 and RD-170. Only somewhat related to this but we've had jet engines since the late 30s. The only thing that really prevented us from scaling them up in the beginning was combustor stability, a fuckhuge turbine was always preferrable. On the other hand small scale engines, for say cruise missiles or even smaller ones for RC planes are hideously complex to make work.

[Anonymous No.11230444]

>>11230416
In general with rockets bigger is better, but I think you'll find that turbomachinery in particular bloats in weight the more it has to handle disproportionately to other components, and while it does share some similarities with jet engines it also isn't entirely comparable. It deals with often cryogenic material that starts off extremely cold and ends up extremely hot, the LOX turbopump has to resist super-hot oxygen's aggressive corrosive action, and the working material passing through the turbomachinery is much denser than intake air in a jet engine, the turbomachine's blades are under much heavier loading. Scaling up jet engines also isn't without issues, the blades of the 777 engine have to be grown via a special process and welded into place as near to perfectly as possible otherwise the excessive loading on them will cause them to crack or shatter when in operation.

I'm not saying it's an non-viable strategy, and frankly to me turbomachinery is just kraut clockwork meme magic and I have no idea if what I'm saying has any merit since it is just a best guess.

[Anonymous No.11230638]

Could it be possible that the $21T missing from Pentagon has something to do with NASA's lies?

[Anonymous No.11230645]

>>11230638
nah

[Anonymous No.11230646]

>>11217683
RIP launch thread Anon!?

[Anonymous No.11230655]

>>11230638
We dumped some of it in the ME, you'd remember that if you weren't 15.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1

[Anonymous No.11230694]

>>11230638
Nice attempt to stir up controversy to boost posting, don't you have a board to moderate or is doing that for free starting to feel unsatisfactory?

[Anonymous No.11230761]

Launch thread anon here. Might have to paste the launch thread body text in here and have someone else post it. I’m about to be at an airport where historically image uploads have been banned on the network

[Anonymous No.11230883]

>>11230761
I guess that can work. Can't you use your mobile data though?

[Anonymous No.11230897]

>>11230883
4chan blocks IP ranges of whole mobile service providers due to abuse (and phoneposters being a plague of low effort shitposters)

[Anonymous No.11230902]

>>11230897
Really? I thought it was only a handful of phone IPs.

[Anonymous No.11230978]

>>11228968
3-ish hours left

[Anonymous No.11231015]

>>11230229

[Anonymous No.11231067]

turns out anons have been behaving themselves on the DIA wifi.

launch thread:
>>11231059

[Anonymous No.11231343]

rip thread, everyone come join the launch thread in the meantime