[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

File: 389 KB, 2048x1583, D69676C1-F5B7-4CB7-B1D6-9C05EF1BC2C3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11519747 No.11519747 [Reply] [Original]

V Has Come To edition

Previous thread: >>11514392

>> No.11519754

Thread theme:


>> No.11519756
File: 66 KB, 941x709, DEPOTS.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

first for DEPOTS

>> No.11519759

Are there any real incentives to develop modules for starship. Axiom are basically acting on a mini ISS. There aren't constellations who can really use the capability.

Also it doesn't seem like there is anything to that large a scale being in development right now. Which would be necessary to facilitate a semi regular launch cadence.

>> No.11519762

What's with space technology and the love for Roman Numerals?

>> No.11519767

No one wants to commit to anything because the whole project is seen as a giant unknown.

>> No.11519785

SpaceX could go the Starlink route and revolutionize cheap, mass produced habitat modules. Seriously, develop a life support lego block and stick it inside an insulated steel can, and you're basically done. The only reason old modules have been so expensive is because they've all been hyper-optimized for low mass while also being total one-off productions.

>> No.11519789

Anyone got the pictures ULA's future plans before and after Shelby's d*p*t freak out?

>Are there any real incentives to develop modules for starship
Not until it flies a couple of times and doesn't fail spectacularly.

>> No.11519790

Honestly at this rate it looks like spacex are going to have to do fucking everything themselves, fortunately the gorillion dollars from starlink will make this possible. They'll make their own habitats, suits, life support gear, etc...

>> No.11519794
File: 254 KB, 459x277, because_its_cool.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11519796

So besides the few starlink launches, they wouldn't need that many to provide enough coverage way down the line.
What kind of demand can they actually generate. It's a really big unkown. Tourism could be a potential boon. IF dear moon works out.
But like large projects that they aren't directly banking and or providing some insurance for...

I do know Starship development is going to take longer than 2-5 years. So it does give a lot of room for developers. But the structures you'd normally rely on to support the market at it's base. Are just not there. You can't build a moon base or a depo even without massive backing.

>> No.11519799
File: 368 KB, 1200x1542, 1531058882814.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11519804
File: 587 KB, 1200x1542, 1569146521577.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>not posting the original

>> No.11519813
File: 122 KB, 728x546, ULA_based_depot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11519823
File: 319 KB, 1200x1542, 1546876740601.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11519842

Just to confirm, there will be expendable launch vehicles yes?

>> No.11519887

1000 years of expendable launch vehicles

>> No.11519900

a hell that cannot be escaped from

>> No.11519908

its all online this year
might actually have some alright talks

>> No.11519913 [DELETED] 
File: 493 KB, 1200x799, UFO Contactee Billy Meier - Electron Pulse Engines.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Electron Engines.

>> No.11519921

why did VASIMR never pan out?

>> No.11519923

And every single rocket will be burnt in the atmosphere or dumped in the ocean

Imagine instead of recovering the shuttles, they left them up at the ISS docked
Just one of those practical ideas huh

>> No.11519924 [DELETED] 
File: 196 KB, 754x500, UFO Contactee Billy Meier - Beamship Propulsion System.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11519927

Because it’s a stupid meme with low isp? Same with every one of these “future engines”

All just grant chasers

>> No.11519934

USSF contracts, selling Starships to foreign governments, private space stations, bigger satellites, bigger space radios, initial asteroid mining tests. The price and volume is unprecedented—you're comparing it to the current volume which is constricted by expense.

>> No.11519935

Because you need a power source so dense it'll might as well be impossible.

The engine itself is actually pretty solid.

>> No.11519945
File: 40 KB, 399x399, MarkKelly.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>> No.11519946

Because it requires too much power. To be used just on the ISS as a demo to do orbital boosts, it would need a battery bank to charge up from the solar panels to do the burn.

>> No.11519947

impossible right now or impossible forever?

>> No.11519957

It’s making progress


>> No.11519964

You could maybe do it with some super lightweight solar film if you could figure out how to deploy a football field or so without it ripping itself apart using almost no weight for the spars. Even then it would only be viable in the inner solar system, past Mars totally not viable. Outside of that you need muh magic fusion box.

>> No.11519990

Why not beam the energy as gamma radiation directly to it from solar panels sent separately

>> No.11519997

No vasimr is just the same as any other electric propulsion
Totally dependent on power supply
Nothing special about it, same efficiencies as any ion thruster but more expensive

>> No.11520004
File: 136 KB, 930x582, commie banter stops.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Post real astrochads

>> No.11520091
File: 896 KB, 2901x1926, skylab_telescope.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11520101


Best crew with most entertaining and heartwarming landing sequence. Future Skylab commanders. Survived a lightning strike right out the gate. Didn't get a J-mission but walking up to Surveyor was cool. Conrad: national treasure with funny teeth. Go to 10:10 and try not to smile.


>> No.11520106
File: 1.27 MB, 1125x2436, 6F33844B-9A09-488E-AF41-5F87946ABF2A.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Starship SN3 testing at 4PM Local tomorrow

>> No.11520131

The metal is only that thick? That's amazing.

>> No.11520134
File: 169 KB, 989x613, 1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Launch vehicle for LUVOIR-A and LUVOIR-B


>> No.11520154

>multi-month extension kit
Only thing that really, really matters for this stage. Everything else is nice, but if ULA actually comes through, this could operate in Mars orbit.

>> No.11520159

Funny way to spell NanoRacks. SpaceX can't do everything all at once. No company or other organization can. Having various, redundant, providers for these devices is how we actually build a new frontier.

>> No.11520166

so, Starship is the ONLY vehicle that can launch Luvoir-A
that's impressive

>> No.11520182
File: 99 KB, 928x726, ap12-KSC-69PC-672_launch.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

They're the kind of heroes we need to deal with our problems now, but not the ones we deserve.


Watching old space shit has helped drown out my suicidal thoughts lately. Maybe I can take a lesson from the space cowboys and hold out until this shit is over, maybe not. Sorry for turning everything dark.

>> No.11520190

Yeah, I think Block 1B and Block 2 isn't happening. Starship is only choice.

>> No.11520192

Block 1B is just the EUS, it'll totally happen
Block 2 is fake news, however

>> No.11520195

shut up, Loser

>> No.11520201

so, what IS Block II SLS?
Block 1B is SLS with the four engine EUS
why the fuck aren't they base-lining a four engine Centaur?

>> No.11520279

Because otherwise they can’t throw billions to everyone involved I guess
Nor defend how long everything takes

Strange how the annual payments just keep happening when the program lasts 4+ years past due date

>> No.11520284


Things were extremely bad in 1968, too. The general public took succor from Apollo 8 at that time.

>> No.11520305


>Which would be necessary to facilitate a semi regular launch cadence.

What so hard to understand about Starlink sats + F9/FH payloads+ tourists?

>> No.11520315

It just occurred to me the other day that Virgin Galactic hasn't done any more baby-hops. Anyone know details?

>> No.11520320
File: 378 KB, 492x900, 1581193529764.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I said last week the virus would cause enough irreparable damage to the world, and we would never get off this rock again.

You all said I was crazy

Am I still crazy?

>> No.11520321


>Also it doesn't seem like there is anything to that large a scale being in development right now.

Because NASA's is on the wrong track and wasting its efforts on SLS, Orion and a program built around them and not building Starship payloads and a program around Starship payloads.

NASA is the entity that would be creating that stuff. SLS and Orion displace crucial beneficial lynchpin activity.

>> No.11520322

yeah, fuck off schizo

>> No.11520323


Why do people keep confusing "the world" and the human species? Same thing as when a geographic locale is described as "large" just because there's a lot of humans there. Makes no sense.

>> No.11520336

>Am I still crazy?
Yes, so far.

>> No.11520383

The pandemic will be a net benefit to the space industry

>> No.11520400

I guess it depends on what you call irreparable

We're obviously set back in time equal to the length of the recession

>> No.11520478 [DELETED] 
File: 38 KB, 321x398, 1585640162383.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11520479

has nobody reported these yet?

>> No.11520487 [DELETED] 


>> No.11520562


>> No.11520575

reported to CDC

>> No.11520577

I'm sorry, is sfg an essential thread?

>> No.11520580

afaik they've been moving everything to spaceport america in new mexico, and then they said there was going to be more delays

>> No.11520594
File: 7 KB, 256x216, 1530210649735.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11520599

/sfg/ is now at risk

>> No.11520603


>> No.11521005

>initial proof test using temperature nitrogen
Combined with a 150m+ hop if anything goes wrong

>> No.11521028

>room temperature nitrogen
Blame Hiro and his pass extortion tactics for me having to phonepost

>> No.11521050
File: 287 KB, 300x225, 1520575233344.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11521054

elon sucks

>> No.11521069


>> No.11521080

expendable viruses

>> No.11521092
File: 1.97 MB, 500x271, 2845d3b85d9d53963b13bfc8dfdd93be.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

covid-19 is a *othing burger. I just had & cough for a few days and I'm fin;

>> No.11521132

Ask again in a few hours. Let‘s see if Elon‘s trash can blows up again.

>> No.11521217
File: 139 KB, 426x276, god.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

no free ventilator for you, faggot

>> No.11521285

SpaceX is gonna be the East India Company of the inner solar system.

>> No.11521299

Starship has full upper stage reuse and more reusable engines as Falcon 9 and pardoxically, it might not even be that much more expensive to build in the first place. They can launch this thing barely filled to replace Falcon 9 launches. The extra fuel wouldn‘t impace the cost calculation at all.

>> No.11521364

The saturation of copycat Spaceflight News youtube channels is getting pretty whacky now.

>> No.11521400

>spaceport America
>inland in the middle of nowhere desert

No orbital launch allowed and they spent hundreds of millions on it...

Why not just pick a random site in Virginia or upstate new york

>> No.11521407


>> No.11521436

>looking at the distance between objects in the solar system
its going to take us forever to explore this bitch

>> No.11521455

The sooner we automate it the better off we'll be I think. Fleets of drones and satellites cataloging everything and preparing settlements for us hopefully.

>> No.11521468
File: 170 KB, 1024x1539, 1526668356243.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>so, what IS Block II SLS?
It is a paper rocket that shall never be.
Even Block 1B is unlikely to happen.

>> No.11521625

Does that include slavery?

>> No.11521641

what makes you say that? I fear things may slow down, albeit probably not by too much.

>> No.11521748 [DELETED] 

coughing and cooming at the same time lads

>> No.11521749

It’s only a few months to and from Mars or Venus.

>> No.11521755

>I said last week the virus would cause enough irreparable damage to the world

Irreparable damage doesn’t exist. Fuck off schizo.

>> No.11521817

you just denied holocaust survivor guilt, antisemitic piece of shit.

>> No.11521823

Why would you feel guilt for surviving the Holocaust that’s dumb

>> No.11521896

Yeah, i stopped watching some videos because the youtube algorythm was starting to flood me with all sorts of space channels, mostly shitty

>> No.11521911

I wish there was a way to watch a video without getting flooded with recommendations other than opening it in an incognito window

>> No.11521931 [DELETED] 

Sauce on titties

>> No.11521932

Everybody thinks he can make money now with yewtube.
Wonder how much guys like scott manley make.

>> No.11521973

yeah, I know that
what makes it different from the initial Block 1 or full size block 1B (w/ EUS)?

>> No.11521996

>Why not beam the energy
Beamed energy is tricky even over distances of hundreds of kilometers. Beaming energy hundreds of millions of kilometers with the time lag that involves is not practical.
Why the hell would you use gamma wavelengths? You want to use a wavelength that will be easily (and mostly) absorbed by the target vehicle's array. Microwaves are best for this.

>> No.11522016

Because gamma sounds cool
More like micropenis

>> No.11522056

>beam microwaves from an orbital structure
>billions of birds are cooked as they fly through
Imagine being a post-apocalyptic society and roast duck just falls out of the sky for you

>> No.11522065

>Far future
>Birds still exist outside of zoos


>> No.11522089

SLS Block 2 is to SLS as Nova was to Saturn V.

That is to say, it's the thing they wanted to build, but had to scale back for reasons. In Nova's case it was because they no longer needed such a huge TLI capacity because they were going to do low Lunar orbit rendezvous. In SLS Block 2's case, the sales pitch was to develop the technology for Block 2 in the background while they rapidly assembled Block 1 to get some bigger launch capacity on the playing field sooner.
Block 2 is still the rocket they want, though. The problem is that their own program decision making to try to limit cost and speed up the return of super heavy launch capacity was retarded and has lead to the SLS program defaulting to work with Block 1. If they decided to go for Block 2 out of the gate they could be a year or two from launching it today, instead of a decade optimistically and more realistically never.
Really the only differences between Block 1 and 2 are the upgraded boosters and the much bigger upper stage. The current upper stage lifted almost directly from the Delta IV rocket family has been heavily delayed anyway, they'd have been much better off just starting by base-lining a 4 RL-10 8m diameter upper stage to begin with. The booster upgrades could come later, it's not like the 5 segment current design boosters would be too weak.

>> No.11522095

I heard somewhere that even with the new boosters, SLS still won't reach the legally mandated by congress performance necessary to be called Block 2

>> No.11522111
File: 112 KB, 673x769, SLS_on_time.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>he current upper stage lifted almost directly from the Delta IV rocket family has been heavily delayed anyway
Source? Because that sounds too ridiculous even for SLS.

>> No.11522115

Hey guys, I'm thinking about buying a black hole. Any advice?

>> No.11522116
File: 516 KB, 1008x720, 1528117972859.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

This is the guy that want's to take our guns.
I feel like the Apollo astronauts wouldn't approve.

>> No.11522124
File: 624 KB, 4114x1896, 07974893-4B7F-4317-9C86-1C7A7A6DACA4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>The current upper stage lifted almost directly from the Delta IV rocket family has been heavily delayed anyway

Straight up bullshit, the ICPS was built by ULA and has been sitting in storage at KSC for several years.

>> No.11522125

I hear Calcutta is nice this time of year.

>> No.11522130

He's pulling it out of his ass. ICPS is on track, but Boeing's software for it to interface with Orion and the rest of the vehicle is not. EUS is way off schedule considering they just did a major redesign of it a couple months back.

>> No.11522149

>but Boeing's software for it to interface with Orion and the rest of the vehicle is not.

Not really, Boeing’s software for the ICPS wasn’t complete because NASA hadn’t given them a finalised trajectory for Artemis 1.

>EUS is way off schedule considering they just did a major redesign of it a couple months back.

EUS is off schedule because it was in a state of limbo due to being deferred, during that limbo period NASA asked Boeing to redesign it for better payload to TLI.

>> No.11522325
File: 18 KB, 320x401, IMG_20200313_213415_877.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

The holobunga didn't happen

>> No.11522495

>pressure test pushed back

>> No.11522529

how obnoxious, stop posting please

>> No.11522532


>> No.11522534
File: 20 KB, 1048x158, EUhzJR1U4AA5Deo[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

room temperature nitrogen test and cryogenic test scheduled for today

>> No.11522546


>> No.11522552
File: 6 KB, 249x228, 1510876391573s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

haha big orange rocket go FWOOOOSHHHH

>> No.11522560

Pushed back only 4 hours right?

>> No.11522576
File: 196 KB, 1500x500, 4DF2C950-7947-4F4A-A8B4-A51449AA902A.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11522586

>NASA says it has received more than 12,000 #astronaut applications, the second highest total ever, behind the 18,300 who applied for the last class. This time, NASA required a master’s (not a bachelor's) in a STEM field.

>> No.11522587


>> No.11522598

how obnoxious, stop posting please

>> No.11522608

Whether or not it launches it's a shitty choice for any space program because it's too expensive.

>> No.11522650

>room temperature nitrogen
That would be a big bang

>> No.11522653

kek, 11522598 is trying to bait uninfected.

>> No.11522686

anons any idea about what I could do with a raspberry pi? obv related to /sfg/ and not building a mini rocket because I've already done that

>> No.11522718

Program a flight controller for a drone

>> No.11522724

But anon room temperature nitrogen fills the majority of my room and there’s no explosions

>> No.11522753

Only until you cough hard enough. Like, 200kg TNT equivalent hard enough. That SN3 will do if it pops.

>> No.11522754

Your room isn't pressurized to six atmospheres.

>> No.11522845

You can tell someone doesn't follow SLS whenever they think it goes: Block 1 -> Block 2 and completely ignore Block 1B.

>> No.11522883

SLS Block 2 is basically just Block 1B with new, better side boosters. There’s not much difference between the two.

>> No.11522922

Not yet anyway

>> No.11522927

cryo test soon right?

>> No.11522929 [DELETED] 

Good excuse to avoid handshankes.

>> No.11522931

Block 2 is at least a decade away, whereas Block 1B is only a few years out. EUS will pass CDR this year - and most of its components already have.

>> No.11522949
File: 129 KB, 937x1170, 1565021801252.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Test at 4PM CST to 8PM CST.

Test of LN2 first at 4 and then Cryos at 8 or so

>> No.11522993
File: 301 KB, 1020x582, 1573882291207.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

so...an hour? hope it goes well.

>> No.11522999

Coofers get out reeeee

>> No.11523034

We are legion.

>> No.11523066

I do know about Block 1B. It's irrelevant to the point, which is that SLS Block 2 is the rocket that wanted, and Block 1 is the rocket they're starting off with and are most likely to be stuck with. Block 1B is what SLS Block 1 should have been. Actually scratch that, Block 2 is what Block 1 should have been. The real Block 2 should have been the one with the Pyrios boosters, also a brand new hydrolox staged combustion main engine cluster.

>> No.11523067 [DELETED] 
File: 280 KB, 646x595, 1554933429359.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>> No.11523068

What's this image from?

>> No.11523070

ah shit when did I get reinfected

>> No.11523076


>> No.11523101 [DELETED] 

Only non whites and women allowed

>> No.11523141

This Starship test will fail, I know this because my dad is a ULA sniper (contracted out for NASA) and he told me so

>> No.11523152
File: 289 KB, 1125x1405, BAC43D4D-B9FB-49F8-BDA1-848CCF6E693E.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11523156

testing, testing, 1 2 3

>> No.11523161

smol falcon

>> No.11523163

That‘s pretty creative for the occasion.

>> No.11523182


>> No.11523188

You're essentially describing Block 1A.

>> No.11523210

No, Block 1A was even more retarded.

I'm saying that EUS and upgraded booster technology should have been part of Block 1. It would have looked a lot like our Block 2. The Block 2 design in turn should have been an advancement beyond solid boosters and RS-25 engines.

>> No.11523274

Nothing sane about the sls
It’ll get it’s 3 launches, and a manned loop around the moon, no landing
And then it’ll be cancelled

And the fact they wasted like 50 billion on it will become common knowledge

>> No.11523276


>> No.11523362

>3 launches

>> No.11523433 [DELETED] 

Healthy here. So let's get some infected to kill this thread. Nobody reply to me

>> No.11523434

Big dildo

>> No.11523520

Why wouldn‘t this work?

>> No.11523528

>implying things in the space industry aren't so unstable right now that any predictions of where we'll be in five years are impossible to make

>> No.11523535

Wouldn't be worth it, also side loads, also staging complexity, also GSE

>> No.11523572

are they testing it?

>> No.11523575
File: 1.70 MB, 1280x720, t.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Landing legs for starship

>> No.11523580

Your wiki link doesn't provide any IQ numbers. You're just making assumptions that line up with a narrative you created. Good job.

A couple more interesting things mentioned though:
>Uneducated and unskilled manual labourers, or 'coolies'. They often worked at the port docks, in construction or private warehouses or factories.
80% of the Indian community

Further down it states
>Scholars have identified two phases in the development of the Indian community after Singaporean independence in 1965.[28] The first phase, from 1965 to the early 1990s, saw a decline in the proportion of the community from 9% in 1957 to a low of 6.4% in 1980. One reason was the withdrawal of British military forces in the early 1970s, which led to the repatriation of many Indian base workers

>Initially, Indian immigrants were predominantly adult men who came from India to find work, serve military duties or prison sentences for several years before returning home. There was a constant flow of Indians in and out of the city, keeping the local community fairly transient.[8][9]

So basically you don't know what the fuck you're even doing.

>> No.11523581

cool but that looks like it's overly complex, just asking for problems

>> No.11523592

Worlds worst choice of lander legs. That's gonna knock over if someone eats too much refried beans from the taco truck.

>> No.11523601

Make sure to exercise and eat healthy

>> No.11523603

Keep it simple, dummies.
That's a recipe for problems.

>> No.11523606

>overly complex
It is a gravity-deployed design with a spring loaded telescoping foot. It's almost as simple as you can possibly get. Even Falcon 9 legs are more technically complex, due to the pneumatic cylinder that needs to lock open and the legs that need TPS and aerodynamic considerations.

>> No.11523607

I heard talk of a Spacex publication on Starship. Like a users guide portfolio thing or whatever. Is that freely available.

>> No.11523611

inb4 they remove the fins too and it's literally just a giant silver dildo

>> No.11523614

It doesn't even look balanced.
What if a single one fails? Then you have to cancel the landing. At least introduce redundancy.

>> No.11523622

It’s on the SpaceX website as a pdf.

>> No.11523639

They could have three fail and be fine, as long as they were arranged in a triangle. Losing any one leg won't cause it to tip.

>> No.11523641

Yeah, the user payload guide is publicly available, but it’s laughably pathetic at only 6(!) pages long. For comparison, New Glenn’s payload guide is 132 pages long, Atlas V’s is 420 (lol), Ariane 5’s is 271 pages, Electron’s is 57 pages long etc. It’s a glorified brochure...


>> No.11523645
File: 314 KB, 2000x1125, falconheavy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11523655

I'll take your word for it.
Maybe it's the depth on the rendering but it doesn't look like the case.
But I don't know nearly enough to argue otherwise.

>> No.11523663

Draw a hexagon. Those are the legs. Mark the center of the hexagon. That's the center of mass. Now scratch out one vertex. You now have a five point shape. The center of mass stays well inside the shape, so the thing wouldn't tip.

>> No.11523685

That makes a lot of sense, and now I feel stupid.

>> No.11523723

>responding to that bait.
Your going to COOF now.

>> No.11523745

It'd be really hard to tip with 9 raptor's worth of weight holding that fucker down. Not to mention the steel is dummy thick towards the bottom.

>> No.11523747
File: 482 KB, 2000x1170, 1564470088898.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

is that how it works?

>> No.11523755

look at your "anonymous"
First signs are already there, you got it.

>> No.11523763

Makes sense as long as the ground is perfectly level.

>> No.11523786

>tfw really want to become an astronaut
>tfw they raised the education requirements
Well fuck, now I have to get a master's. I was already thinking about it though.

>> No.11523794

It also would not hurt your chances if you were a african american lesbian trans muslim woman.

>> No.11523799

I know this site has a raging inferiority complex but not really.

I am a black man though. I'm honestly scared of not being selected because I'm a black dude.

>> No.11523815


>> No.11523816

The problem is if 2 or more legs fail from a hard or inclined landing, they will likely be next to each other

>> No.11523821

any cryo yet bois?

>> No.11523822

Guides are a jobs program for writers

>> No.11523823

There is no atmosphere on the moon to block the solar wind
Need wide legs so you don’t tip

>> No.11523829

well, let's say it's a 3 man mission.
one from the chair force
two civies
And at least on or two have to be a woman, because nasa has made it clear that the first boots on the ground for this new mission will be from a woman.
And you have to compete with thousands of others, your chances at getting on this flight is as big as any white male.

>> No.11523830


>> No.11523854

isnt lunar regolith very soft, like powder? wouldnt starship need wide feet for something like that?

>> No.11523858

>well, let's say it's a 3 man mission.

It’ll be a crew of 4 no matter where your being sent, both Orion and Dragon have a crew of 4, whilst Starliner has the option of an additional 5th seat, but that space will probably be used for extra internal cargo.

>> No.11523865

starship isn't planning on landing on the moon

>> No.11523866

>And you have to compete with thousands of others, your chances at getting on this flight is as big as any white male.
That's my one and only comfort.

I do hope space exploration goes through a huge boom in the next couple of decades, thus increasing demands for astronauts. I want to go to space, dammit.

>> No.11523868

its going to be landing everywhere

>> No.11523872

Hasn't Musk said that it'll be used for Lunar missions as well as Mars?

Couldn't they just modify the landing feet for it in that case? Or maybe build some kind of landing/launch pad for it?

>> No.11523875

they'd have to build a landing pad, but almost certainly can't finance the trip to build the pad, so starship is never going to the moon

>> No.11523876

Your competing against Scott Manley, so your fucked anyway dude...

What’s with the laughing emoji?

>> No.11523883

>they'd have to build a landing pad, but almost certainly can't finance the trip to build the pad, so starship is never going to the moon
I don't see why not?

Also, if it's mutually beneficial between SpaceX, NASA, the ESA, etc., I could see it happening.

>> No.11523891

they're going to want to do another decade of ISS research about how concrete dries in space first

>> No.11523894

starship would weight 16% of its earth weight on the moon

Also wouldn't the propulsive landing blow the soft material off the bedrock?

>> No.11523901
File: 182 KB, 728x511, 1583483245425.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>What’s with the laughing emoji?
i cant see anything? i guess anons that have it cant see that they are immune to the coofs. it explains why i lost all of my biohazard stuff.

>> No.11523922

The small landing base worries me. I don't think that could handle any slope nor uneven ground.

>> No.11523955

nvm it was 4chan messing up, i see everything again

>> No.11524045

Here's a 4k livestream of the tower


I guess we can't know when it'll start

>> No.11524046

Pad required then? That's not great news for trying to put one on Mars, how the hell can you erect a level platform via remote control?

>> No.11524066

Glass the surface with a nuke, by remote.
Problem fixed.

>> No.11524067

>truck still moving on the pad
Meh. I‘ll just go to sleep.
Hopefully there won‘t be anything to see anyway.

>> No.11524075

tell her you post in a website for homos and shell come out of the grave to slap your shit.

>> No.11524076

Works for me but I doubt Elon's gonna get a privately-owned McNuke any time soon.
I wonder what Martian Trinitite would look like?

>> No.11524120

For the population at large and especially at the governmental/policymaker level, this pandemic will serve as a warning against keeping all our eggs in one basket.

Society forgets within a single generation how fragile our modern industrial system is- how quickly we can be deprived of the conveniences that make people soft. Political opinions change in an instant when faced with such an enormous, implacable threat- nobody's bitching about gun control right now, for example. All of a sudden, people are forced to reassess their stance on a number of issues.

When Musk and Bezos go on their spiels about wanting to industrialize space as a way to secure the survival of the species, the dangers they cite aren't REAL for most people listening. It's not a compelling argument because too many people can't contextualize a species-wide threat. Hell, too many people have never even seen empty shelves at their own grocery store. Now though, the threat is real in the minds of even the most ignorant. In the future, when Musky goes onstage and talks about wanting to establish an offworld presence before our theoretical window slams shut, normies will know what he's fucking talking about because an invisible killer swept the world, probably killing several million, and we weren't ready for it.

>> No.11524127

The concern is that the moon dust (which is nasty stuff) would actually be blown into orbit... where it might hit Gatewat.

>> No.11524130

I think you're very wrong about how people will react and they're going to see any amount of money set aside for "aspirational" projects that have no immediate benefit as a failure of priorities.
What you should be worried about is the countries all over the world voting autocrats into absolute power and mass surveillance and how much the virus benefits governments from a standpoint of consolidation of power. That will be the threat boiling under the surface in the next decade.

>> No.11524139

Chad starship VS Virgin Gateway

>> No.11524141

Good thing gateway has been gassed already.

>> No.11524159

Could it really be blown to escape velocity? That's kind of crazy

>> No.11524164

>cislunar space is going to be filled with a cloud of razorsharp carcinogenic moon dust that sticks to everything

>> No.11524166

Moon dust window washer job when?

>> No.11524172

yeah, starship creates a giant dust plume that stays in orbit permanently and then falls over and blows up

>> No.11524182

I'm a bit rusty, but IIRC enthalpy of formation is written as
[math]2O\to O_2[/math], with [math]\Delta H_f=0\frac{J}{mol}[/math]
To break the [math]O_2[/math] bond, you reverse that reaction. So,
[math]O_2\to 2O[/math], with [math]\Delta H_f=-0\frac{J}{mol}[/math]
While there is an explicit, non-zero bond energy associated with splitting [math]O_2[/math], the [math]relative[/math] change is, by definition, zero. So relative to the enthalpy of formation, it takes 0 additional energy to break the oxygen double bond.

>> No.11524184

Its V0.9. Works fine for current tests. Wider/longer/self balancing legs for later variants.

>> No.11524221

Fortunately their Amazon spending has went up during the lockdown anyway so it doesn’t matter how much they cry about how Bezos should be dumping his money in Africa.

>> No.11524223

It doesn't need escape velocity (escape the gravity of the moon), it just needs to go orbital or merely ballistic.
Thinking about it, it isn't likely to go orbital, if it doesn't escape, the orbit should at least intersect where it came from, because there is no circularization boost.

>> No.11524224
File: 634 KB, 1364x1150, The_Complete_Asimov.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

What would an old large space station look like? One that has been around for a generation or more? Would the round revolving section get longer like an extruding cylinder? Would multiple rotating sections be added? Would it be clear which parts of the station are older than others, or would the outside be redressed every so often?

>> No.11524236

Because some flu running around killing a few thousand is the end of the world lol
Or it’s easier to colonize other uninhabitable worlds vs just not having people flying in every day

>> No.11524281

You're making a macro argument, suggesting that the populace at large will support space colonization in the long run. Maybe the argument holds up, maybe it doesn't, but I'm more worried about the short term and what is practically happening. If John D. Service Worker watches a 14 minute video on the biography of Elon Musk, maybe he'll go "Hey I agree with this guy now, with all the dangers in the world it certainly is a good idea to spread out our civilization." but you aren't going to get him go dedicate his life to it because of the pandemic. What I see as more likely is the entire space sector going through a hiccup for the next year or two due to a changing economic landscape.
The solution to a pandemic isn't space exploration, so I don't really see the normie masses suddenly deciding it's time to invest in moonbases.

>> No.11524299

Cut the pretentious shit and fuck off already. You’re bemoaning postApollo problems. Everyone’s proSpace now because rockets mean satellites and satellites mean internet and the average normie is preaching about how internet is a necessity not a luxury. SpaceX (ULA and most everything else) is kept alive by DoD money and Blue Origin will never have money trouble as long as Amazon is going. Virgin Galactic survived one recession back when they were floundering. They’ll be fine with another.

Apollo 12 was a ratings dissapointed. Who cares it doesn’t matter anymore and it really shouldn’t have mattered then.

>> No.11524318

Virgin galactic is suborbital only...

>> No.11524368

SpaceX applied for CLPS, to send payloan on lunar surface.

>> No.11524382

You can do the exact same thing except introduce a tilt, which will move the center of mass point on the ground towards the legs in a single direction. Even for an uneven surface, where the leg furthest down slop failed to deploy, there's still a few degrees of tilt which would need to be exceeded in order to tip the thing over.

>> No.11524388

Most of the mass of Starship will actually located near the top on landings, because cargo mass and header tanks. A typical reentry on Earth for example with empty main tanks needs to have the COM nearly halfway up the vehicle in order for bellyflop reentry to be stable. Also, Raptors do not weigh much.

>> No.11524406

The legs likely to fail on an inclined landing would be the ones uphill, which is ideal. They'd hit first, at higher speed. Anyway, the point to focus on here is that the deployment mechanism in the design is as simple as can be, and unlike the legs on Falcon 9, they don't need to lock in place or anything. They just swing down and out, and get buttressed against the skirt hard points, with some internal shock absorption capability (probably not crush cores because muh rapid reusability). I can't think of a better design, honestly. Anything else would be at best the same reliability with increased mass, at worst introduce more failure points and introduce significantly more mass.

>> No.11524413

Jesus not usually one for the Ok boomer hating but fuck me theres some old tards in the labpadre chat tonight.

>> No.11524414

Nonsense trash comment
Depends on where you are. There's a layer of fine dust over everything, but in most places it's a centimeter thick or less, basically a thin dusting. Most of the Moon's surface is like coarse gravel, and some places have pretty much exposed bedrock, which makes for prime pre-built natural landing pads.

>> No.11524424
File: 221 KB, 748x950, SS_launchpad.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Something like this could work for Starship landing on Moon.

>> No.11524433

SpaceX has put out multiple renders of Starship on the Moon as well as outright stating multiple times that Starship can do Moon and Mars. It's highly likely that Starship will land on the Moon years before the first Mars missions, even unmanned ones, simply because the Moon is so close and takes so much less time to get to.

SpaceX will probably be able to do a totally unmanned Starship Moon landing, which goes, touches down, stays a few days to much fanfare on Earth, then launches again back to Earth for reentry and inspections. SpaceX can then turn to NASA, as well as literally any rich enough person or government or company, and tell them they can start buying Moon landing tickets if they want, for up to 100 tons delivered. It won't matter what NASA's doing, or where SLS is at, or what China or Russia or ESA have cooking up, world governments WILL pivot to wanting access to that capability. This will also obviously accelerate all the new generation reusable rocket plans in the making worldwide, as China is probably not going to be allowed on to Starship ever, but they'll absolutely want to be competitive when a decade of delay could mean losing the potential to dominate entire celestial objects.

>> No.11524440

What would you have to make these out of for them not to ablate away the first time you tried landing on it? You'd have to anchor it too or the exhaust would blow the panels away. Could a robot lay these things out one by one and anchor them, or would you absolutely need crew on the surface first?

>> No.11524495

>Virgin Galactic
Could disappear tomorrow and nothing would change, they're a joke

>> No.11524501

Just fucking land on a plate of exposed bedrock, which we already know exist, goddamn
Don't make this so complicated.

>> No.11524512

No I mean the craft is incline, it comes in at an angle in the animations.

>> No.11524523

Of course it comes in at an angle, it bellyflops into the atmosphere. It always comes straight down in the final landing descent. On the Moon this will be true as well, because Starship will land simply by executing a single long deceleration burn.

>> No.11524535


Look how aggressively angled it is. Even when it's at its own height above the ground it's got a lot of lean to it. And this is a smooth idealized animation, I expect the real thing to be a little more brutal and precarious.

I'm not so concerned about moon and mars landings because the non existent and thin atmospheres. But a misfed wind report put a falcon 9 in the bathtub recently. Starship straightens out much closer the ground with tiny legs.

>> No.11524587

I don't see what you mean, it's coming straight down.

>> No.11524601

so there was no test today?

>> No.11524612

There's dudes on a cherry picker doing something at the base wall now. No idea if something is wrong or it's just taking this long for final checks

>> No.11524863

10 dollars says musk tries to land a Tesla on the moon first thing

>> No.11524928

where's the fucking test

>> No.11524954
File: 430 KB, 1545x1487, 1560570673706.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

a test could still happen tonight

>> No.11524972



>> No.11524999
File: 2.41 MB, 4501x6001, sls-deep-space-infographic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

so like, why did nasa make sls blue here?

>> No.11525002

orange rocket bad

>> No.11525048

Yes and it has strange consequences.


>> No.11525049


>> No.11525112

next testing window opens up in 13 minutes
it will be open for an hour

>> No.11525173

So if this blows up what's the plan for SN4?

Is starship dead if elon can't get this to work single wall?

>> No.11525190

>8 hours later and there are STILL people on the pad
Alright bros, Mars is cancelled. Pack it up.

>> No.11525258

Build better? Elon isn't too concerned about starship blowing up. He's more concerned about getting a production line up and running first and foremost. With a production line, he can test out ton of stuff, if needed, and pull out cheap starship every week.

>> No.11525272
File: 202 KB, 1280x1014, Facon_9_Waifu.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>> No.11525302
File: 36 KB, 650x650, sad-crying-pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Test delayed, it's over. Starship is dead.

>> No.11525305
File: 121 KB, 1280x720, 1341184971808.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11525313

It’s still all hand welding in the shed so far
Back to the Apollo days of low paid skilled workers doing manual work

>> No.11525729

with enough fuel already in space it's ridiculously short
1g constant acceleration times, decelerating halfway
Moon - 3 hours
Mars - 1.5 days
Jupiter - 5 days
Saturn - 8 days

>> No.11525747
File: 188 KB, 1006x2135, voyager-tan-1372972924327.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

You still have to brake once you get there, unless you're just taking drive-by pictures and not stopping or coming back to Earth.

>> No.11525752

>Measuring propellant in mass instead of delta v
Mang I have no idea how good this thing is

>> No.11525754

You can't just scoop up a couple of hydrogen atoms and burn for 8 days what the fuck are you smoking nigger

>> No.11525769

read it again, that's what he said

>> No.11525789
File: 498 KB, 480x360, 1563761847308.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

one day we'll get there

>> No.11525797
File: 601 KB, 2048x1326, CAE9C832-DA28-4A37-AA72-937EF98E46F8.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Guess what this is...

>> No.11525807

that's the Soviet switchblade flyback wing in the picture in the top left

>> No.11525829
File: 2.15 MB, 3300x2551, index.php.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

thanks Tory

>> No.11525847


Nope. But I didn’t notice the Baikal fly back booster in the background until you pointed it out.

>> No.11525856
File: 62 KB, 600x450, Angara_A5.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11525904

based and epstein-pilled

>> No.11525942

Yes, Angara A5 No.2

>> No.11525948
File: 911 KB, 731x541, 6A2E0C96-2505-464F-86CE-E3D4CF21F8F9.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Something definitely was burning...

>> No.11525950

Where is that?

>> No.11525965

You can just plug in the numbers

>> No.11525968

I think it’d look cool for a rocket to be blue

>> No.11525975

rockets in general are pretty ugly. They're made cool because of what they do, but still.

>> No.11525978
File: 298 KB, 1276x1920, DeltaII_THEMIS.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Based and delta-pilled

>> No.11525984

that's green

>> No.11525990
File: 67 KB, 589x622, C5B00DD0-95B3-48A5-8BFD-3188AEBAE85C.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Delta 4 was originally supposed to be blue like the Delta 2 was. According to Tory Bruno, Boeing gave up on this idea and left it unpainted orange instead because the blue paint and insulation foam don’t play nice together.

>> No.11525991

*Delta Blue

>> No.11525996

did he kiss the tip

>> No.11526005
File: 366 KB, 2400x1600, DeltaII.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11526009

>that's green

You really have no idea how color works
Something is blue if people think it looks blue
Something is green if people think it looks green

>> No.11526010

Starship SN3 is pressurized.

>> No.11526022

I think it's green therefore it's green
they are wrong

>> No.11526026

people say it is delta blue. silence,idiot.

>> No.11526080

It's mostly welded by robots, already.

>> No.11526084

Granted to do this you really need magic fusion engines that are close to 100% efficient and orders of magnitude higher power than anything we're likely to actually build while also being no heavier than chemical engines currently are.

>> No.11526085

He said "decelerating halfway" which means accelerating for half the distance and flipping to slow down the other half.

>> No.11526095

>why is there steam coming out of the top?

>> No.11526105

It is my hope that spaceship engines go the same way as the microprocessor. It seems equally as impossible to us now as cellphones and modern computers would have seemed to anyone back in the 50s and they would have cited exactly the same physical and material constraints. It just takes the infrastructure needed to mobilize the industry and for craft to start being built without the intention of launching off Earth.

>> No.11526110
File: 32 KB, 259x195, 1328360783475.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

see >>11525769

>> No.11526115

We will eventually discover FTL and be able to make new universes for fun

>> No.11526129
File: 92 KB, 800x324, 1562061017532.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

are warp drives actually feasible or is it just nonsense made up of astronomical energy use and nerd fantasy?

>> No.11526139

FTL is a spook—we just need to solve aging and then the time and distance of travel stops mattering. If you read enough about the physics, it becomes obvious that FTL is nonsensical. "Faster than light" as a statement is a contradiction.

>> No.11526140

Feasible provided that negative mass exists, which hasn't been shown yet.

>> No.11526145 [DELETED] 
File: 493 KB, 1200x799, 1555132324380.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

why was this deleted?

>> No.11526157

Probably because its word salad and consists almost entirely of nonsense.

>> No.11526160

>If you read enough about the physics, it becomes obvious that FTL is nonsensical.

Yeah dude modern physicists know literally everything

>> No.11526175

>Yeah dude modern physicists know literally everything
we know a lot about the descriptive properties of the universe of which the lightspeed limit is one of them.

>> No.11526182
File: 551 KB, 2048x1365, CBD73A3F-FC47-40A9-A739-C57D31A61188.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Cool, cool.

>> No.11526184
File: 86 KB, 938x938, 1370731105025.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

based mods are based

>> No.11526188
File: 481 KB, 1200x900, 1582911693401.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11526189

We don’t know that either

>> No.11526196

ok, yeah I deleted my own post

>> No.11526198

>lmao dark matter therefore physicists are all frauds that don't know anything
fuck off

>> No.11526208

>when you've been delayed so much that you make the SLS look punctual

>> No.11526210

Never said physicists don’t know anything. You’re very salty when your priests are criticized.

>> No.11526220

Good don't post garbage here again.

>> No.11526223

I didn't originally post it
I genuinely saw a deleted post and wanted to know the reason

>> No.11526224
File: 115 KB, 350x465, seaBase.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anyone know any good sources discussing how would interplanetary trade work? Most of the stuff I could find focuses on interstellar trade instead.

>> No.11526231

I’d imagine it’d be mostly fusion fuel and rare metals from asteroids.

>> No.11526236

what part of it? The legal structure or needed infrastructure or available resources or economic viability? There's a lot of things to think about concerning interplanetary trade and primarily you need to consider that Earth basically has everything it needs, so it needs to be many times cheaper to get it from space to justify trading for it.

>> No.11526244

Even if it were theoretically possible, which is up in the air, we don‘t actually have any way to actually influence the fabric of space time and do whatever the fuck we please with it.

>> No.11526249

SN3 has been depressurized.

>> No.11526250
File: 2.02 MB, 2500x1407, 1562491043497.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

is there ANYTHING AT ALL to the IXS design?

>> No.11526251

Could we mine the mantle?

>> No.11526255

Sorry for not specifying. I meant a high level overview in that post because I figured that such would only be available given how little material I've found. But I'm more interested in trade that doesn't involve Earth (for example, between two colonies such as Mars or the Asteroid belt or even including the moon), both in how it would be structured legally and how the infrastructure beset up. Also, I'm interested in what would be exchanged.

>> No.11526262

>is there ANYTHING AT ALL to the IXS design?

A hearty dose of wishful thinking.

>> No.11526288

Don't be gay. The technological limitations are nothing alike. Processing power has gone up like crazy only because we've become better and better at etching silicon wafers into transistor arrays and using those transistors in smaller integrated circuit boards. There was NOTHING physically in the way of our progress in that field EXCEPT our own in-expertise, which has gone away.

Compare that to chemical engines, which quite rapidly hit the ceiling for specific impulse all the way back in the 50's, and 70 years later hasn't been improved upon much (granted engine technology is much better in the sense that they're easier and faster to build, and in some cases are much more flexible, eg Merlin 1D and Raptor). The issue however has never been one of specific impulse. The issue is vehicle design. You could come up with the best engine ever, it's super efficient and all that, and launch vehicle designers today would stick it onto the bottom of a fuck off big first stage, slap on some boosters to get it high and fast enough that the efficient main engine could take over, and then claim that they were saving money by no longer needing a 2nd stage to put decent payloads into orbit, meanwhile the super efficient engine slams into the ocean and is destroyed every time (sound familiar?).

Starship Super Heavy is an awesome vehicle design, but lets not kid ourselves. There's basically nothing on that vehicle that couldn't be accomplished back in the 70's or even the 60's. Sure, without ridiculously high chamber pressure and good Isp Raptor engines the payload takes a hit. Sure, without modern computers landing the stages propulsively on they asses is probably not worth the effort. You know what though? Develop two large lifting body stages, use kerosene on the first stage, hydrogen on the 2nd stage, gas generator engines, stack them tip to tail, and you have a 1970's Starship equivalent using Saturn V engine tech which can put ~50 tons into LEO fully reusable.

>> No.11526296

how does gravity work

>> No.11526303


>> No.11526309

I said DESCRIPTIVE properties. We can describe the effects of gravity in great detail just as we can describe light. Figuring how or why something works is a different problem altogether.

>> No.11526312

>Also, I'm interested in what would be exchanged.
Extremely large amounts of bulk, cheap resources (basalt fiber, steel/aluminum/titanium, water, rare earths), nuclear fuels (fission and fusion), extremely valuable and rare substances (phosphorous, copper).

>> No.11526321
File: 31 KB, 640x433, 4962efd5b3b9877992d3bd0c796c42ae.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

It has a veneer of realism and not much else, doesn't even have radiators, why would such an advanced ship not use rotohabs instead of four sets of stacked can habs? Why does it have what appear to be solar panels when any kind of space drive is still going to need some form of reactor to generate it's energy? Why is the primary antenna pointing forward where the ship is going and not backward to stay in communication with Earth? Why is this ship which is obviously designed exclusively for spaceflight using a command module that looks more like the nose of a shuttle or airplane? Why is it so compact when generally speaking you want to hold your reactor and it's fuel (whether it's a fission, fusion, antimatter, or whatever over reactor you can think of) away from the crewed modules?

>> No.11526335


>> No.11526349
File: 412 KB, 1272x533, 2020 space station Valerian.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Look at the ISS. It started back in 1998 and is now over 2 decades old. It basically looks like a patchwork quilt of modules. I think the station in the movie, "Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets," shows a fairly valid progression of such a station over generations:


>> No.11526358
File: 1.56 MB, 400x225, ISS construction.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Have a gif, not sure how out of date it is though.

>> No.11526380

>I think the station in the movie, "Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets," shows a fairly valid progression of such a station over generations:
I'm not so sure about that. I feel that the whole station would tend to oscillate like a tuning fork with some of the depicted older versions like in your pic.

>> No.11526387

I still couldn't quite tell whether that's shopped or not. Reverse search turned up nothing.

>> No.11526394
File: 364 KB, 1125x1427, BC85738E-184A-4ED4-8B4F-CFAAF35E4401.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11526407

Worm confirm

>> No.11526411

The ISS already shakes during orbit keeping burns. I imagine something like in that pic would not work very well when it needs to be boosted back up unless it was in geostationary orbit.

>> No.11526495
File: 152 KB, 5000x1379, NASA_Worm_logo-5000px.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

based worm

>> No.11526499

So they're bringing back the logo of my childhood. Let's hope they're not bringing back the pyrotechnics of my childhood alongside the SRBs of my childhood too.

>> No.11526539

What do you think the SLS is using?

>> No.11526548

You can claim it's "new and improved", but it's the same boosters with a segment added.

>> No.11526566
File: 392 KB, 784x2000, tanks.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>> No.11526568

The extra segment and other smaller improvements has lead to a 3,500kN thrust increase and longer burn time, so it is improved but nobody is pretending their new, thats what the BOLEs are for.

>> No.11526574

As long as it keeps its pyrotechnic tendencies under control, that's great.

>> No.11526606

Well now that the vehicle is mounted on the top instead of the side, safety is much improved.

>> No.11526613

I wouldn't trust anything Boing was involved with whether I was riding on top or on the side anyway.

>> No.11526648

So you’ve never flown on an airplane? Sucks for you dude...

>> No.11526653

>Boeing are the only company who make airplanes

>> No.11526661

Because Boeing is a monopoly on commuter airplanes, right?
You're more likely to fly an Airbus around these parts, man. That doesn't mean I haven't been on a Boeing in my life, I wouldn't get on board one of their planes at the current state their company is in though.

Would you fly a MAX Plow?

>> No.11526669


>> No.11526683

Looks a bit too stretched out, I'd think stations would be more compact. Very cool video though.

>> No.11526687

too bad the rest of the movie sucked

>> No.11526689

>I just don't understand this reusable plow meme . . .

>> No.11526696

Was that the pressure test or just the fill test or whatever

>> No.11526699

Who said anything about reusable?

>[HL2 Combine Tower Alert Noise Intensifies]

>> No.11526711


>Because Boeing is a monopoly on commuter airplanes

Sorry, let me correct myself. They have a duopoly on large commercial aircraft.

>> No.11526729
File: 650 KB, 540x381, 1558308204293.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11526772

What was even the point of this test. You must be really confident in your vessel to pressurize it with gas because if it pops it'd wreck the test stand and everything around, why test then. You can't detect small leaks either because at this volune it'd take forever to cause any noticeable pressure change on top of being completely drowned out by pressure swings caused by sun heating and ambient temperature changes

>> No.11526775

I think this was the room temperature test and one at cryo is still impending. I don‘t know what that means for pressure though. I guess the steel should be stronger at cryo so maybe they‘ll crank it up a bit further yet.

>> No.11526780

Trinkets and entertainment unless draconic IP laws are enforcible in which case everything's possible including breathable air shipped from jupiter because the local authorities tax breathing natural plant-made oxygen too harshly. The current epidemic could, in theory if local medical industry was disrupted or simply decayed into africa-tier over time, imply possibility of shipping medication as well. After all even water can be worth its weight in gold many times if you really really need it and can't get it.

>> No.11526907

Why would you do a hydrogen upper
Lox and methane would be better even back then for all the same reasons people are picking it now

You would still do vertical landing as well, it would just be slower and using lower thrust engines

>> No.11526919

The easiest way to test like a hundred miles of welds is just to pressurize it

>> No.11526938

Anon, making a pressure vessel that can take all that beating and still be dirt cheap is the purpose of these tests.
A starship will be flying dozens of times a year, it has to be capable of working on earth, in space, and on the moon and mars.
You need something that can take a punishment.

>> No.11526949

LN2 fill should be starting now.

>> No.11527053

What I mean is if it popped again it would very likely trash not only the stand (again) but also the surrounding ground equipment which isn't cheap and quick to repair. Pressure tests are done above the rated pressure and bear high risk of explosion, that's why they're normally done using liquid that's incompressible and won't do much damage in case of rupture. Testing with gas means they're either highly confident it would hold (which makes the test pretty much a pointless waste of time) or can afford the damage (doubt)

>> No.11527140

They're allowed by the equations, but just because you can plug something into an equation doesn't mean it actually exists. Even newton's equations allow for spooky shit if you allow negative mass.

>> No.11527190
File: 100 KB, 1224x1024, 1224px-NASA_logo.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Why didn't they keep that type face for the insignia? You know instead of keeping the space shuttle?

>> No.11527215

>Meh. I prefer the meatball. To me the worm logo is representative of the most anemic era of the agency. It feels less like Apollo and more like SpaceCamp. It feels like puffy parachute pants and perms and farting around purposelessly in LEO rather than going places. The meatball logo makes me feel excited. The worm makes me feel like I'm going to a convention.
i feel the same way, i hate the worm and 90s nasa so much. i get angry just thinking about them.

>> No.11527219

I'm calling it. The ISS is going to be a relic in the near future. Hopefully it'll become a museum.

Just as we're all ready to bury SLS, the only failure at nasa wasn't cheap lifting. They also milked microgravity research with the same inefficient operation instead increasing our capabilities on the moon and mars.

The internal volume of starship is massive. You could easily fit it for long term habitation and resupply and just turn it into a space station. Make microgravity research affordable so we can move the fuck on and NASA is cornered into progress.

>> No.11527222

I was a retarded kid in the 90s, but what's so exciting about nasa's meatball era?

>> No.11527234
File: 1.09 MB, 4000x2248, EUoLPc-XsAAVVDD.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>NASA Outlines Lunar Surface Sustainability Concept

>> No.11527238

Cryo test happening now


>> No.11527271

> I was a retarded kid in the 90s

You haven’t changed very much you piece of shit motherfucker

>> No.11527273

>ever going to mars

They don't even have a large vehicle for the transfer which is the hardest part. Get in line for some seats on starship faggots.

>> No.11527277

Dem camera shakes

>> No.11527278

So ambitious!! They want one hab on the moon? Can't we just stay on gateway?? Fuck this is really shit

>> No.11527282

Elon confirmed they passed the pressure test last night with water, should be a piece of cake with cryo now.

>> No.11527286

As cynical as I am about any of NASA's ambitious plans, I really hope that they pull this through somehow. Lunar bases are always cool. Gateway should be used for a lunar seismic experiment after the base is established though.

>> No.11527289

you can tell they're serious by the way there aren't any dates or even a vague timeline

>> No.11527302

But it’s like what the fuck is the point of “microgravity research”
They should have built the station to rotate at 0.1 g

Then you’d be getting info that is actually relevant to the future

>> No.11527305

>But it’s like what the fuck is the point of “microgravity research”
It kept a consistent cross-administration budget for an agency that was at risk of being dismantled.

>> No.11527310
File: 107 KB, 1200x675, DA0B51A5-FCD0-4B51-A0CA-2F706C6D7740.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>So ambitious!! They want one hab on the moon?

It’s obviously just a placeholder for future habitats and it’s better to start small than over promise and under deliver.

There are other diagrams with dates (pic-related). Also, now isn’t really the time for new target dates to be announced...

>> No.11527317
File: 1.01 MB, 4000x2248, 1585866644262.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.11527323

Exactly. I'm sure this is going lead absolutely no where.
They just emptied SN3, hopefully they continue with the test.

>> No.11527325

>no dozer
>no excavator
>no big drills
>no smelters or fields of solar panels

But hey 30 years of Isru technology demonstrations

>> No.11527331

It is really better to make a new one in a cheaper more stable orbit.

>> No.11527333

>landing a bunch of times without building any infrastructure on the surface
>landing demonstrations for a Mars mission that won‘t even be conceptualized at that point

>> No.11527334

Will ISRU research become the new microgravity research?

>> No.11527336

The instant someone has boots on the ground for people stationed there it will become a race for other countries to stake claims and/or get on board with it.

>> No.11527338

They've used that logo longer after 1992 than they did before 1975

You're in the meatball era lmao

>> No.11527345

>landing demonstrations for a Mars mission that won‘t even be conceptualized at that point

No one at nasa is asking sobering questions like, "weren't landers and rovers we sent to mars "landing demonstrations"?

>> No.11527349

Oh no those landers were just for fun and the fact they provided literally zero useful information for follow on missions is incidental

All you have to do is call it “science”

>> No.11527352

I will believe the underpromise and over deliver when SLS flies. Just as I will believe starship when it flies and lands. The last cool thing NASA did was New Horizons. Let them get SLS functional before 2022 and I will be happy.

>> No.11527353

Considering how far backwards NASA has fallen, I wouldn't be surprised if they somehow lost the ability to land large objects on the Moon or Mars. I would be upset, but not surprised.

>> No.11527366
File: 3.72 MB, 581x327, but_why.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>4 years from now to land a human on the moon using a lander that hasn't even been designed

>> No.11527370

Using a rocket that hasn’t flown yet and is still at least a year away

>> No.11527384

You know what I like most about Apollo? They started with a goal in mind, looked what kind of vehicle and techniques they needed to get there and then they went the extra steps of testing all the things as quickly as possible separately, so they only had to strap them all together anymore once all of it came together.
Now it‘s all ass backwards. They get a vehicle pushed on them by law and need to figure out what to do with it, while still vaguely keeping up appearances like this is all going to be genuine, lasting progress. This may work somewhat for the moon, because the rocket they are stuck with is coincidentally a moon rocket. But for Mars they just don‘t have the right tool for the job and you‘d probably get fired for proposing something else.

>> No.11527387

There’s 3 SLS cores and Orion capsules currently being assembled, they won’t be the holdup unless something goes horribly wrong. The lander is the critical path.

>> No.11527407

I blame politics for that. NASA is forced to have this vague approach towards their future plans, because a focused plan can be easily budgeted ahead of time and that'll scare off any politician. Meanwhile a vague plan won't have an upfront budget while being able to rake in more money without the politicians really understanding what's happening.

SLS is on the critical path, but yet it took almost ten years to make a propellant tank and avionics for it.

>> No.11527410

Yea but it started with the shuttle and now it’s been 50 years of the same thing so
Nothing going to change

I’d say the problem is more with nasa than it is with political micromanagement
It’s not like you see staff at nasa publicly complaining, all of them have their jobs because of this exact status quo

>> No.11527427

>SLS is on the critical path, but yet it took almost ten years to make a propellant tank and avionics for it.

No, the production of SLS’ flight tanks started in 2016...

>> No.11527440

...it‘s almost like these long-term moon and mars projects are just too expensive to propose using conventional rockets...

>> No.11527456

>literally any rich enough person or government or company
nah spacex are operating in the us so they still have to play ball with the US, there's no way they could sell flights to foreign governments without the say so from half a dozen different government departments

>> No.11527461

at least nasa is proposing send people to the moon
china wants to have a robotic outpost

>> No.11527469

Chinese are robots so it’s close enough

>> No.11527512

So a normal Chinese outpost?

>> No.11527526

I meant make as in design and build. If it took NASA 10 years to design and build a propellant tank and avionics for a rocket that uses well understood engines and boosters, then how long would it take for NASA to design and build a lander from scratch?

>> No.11527542
File: 30 KB, 186x160, 1528597811651.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Guys, stop being dicks.
The Chinese are bugs, robots are cool.

>> No.11527557

>then how long would it take for NASA to design and build a lander from scratch?

NASA isn’t designing or building HLS though, that’s up to the contractor.

>> No.11527572

New >>11527570

>> No.11527600

"There were some customers, commercial customers in particular, who wanted their own colors on the rocket. They wanted a black color or they wanted a yellow color," recalled Witzling. "But we always found a way to way around that because of 'technical issues.'

the mind set of old space