/sfg/ Space Flight General

[Anonymous No.11531235]

Solids Boi edition

previously >>>11527570

[Anonymous No.11531262]

>solids

[Anonymous No.11531325]

Covid 19 will shut down the starship project. We are never leaving this planet.

[Anonymous No.11531326]

>>11531325
Ok doomer

[Anonymous No.11531406]

I am gonna say it. Starship will be fine. We are just on Elon-Time, if we were on NASA time it'd be even worse.

Elon time puts the first one that flies by fall. It'll be fine.

[Anonymous No.11531422]

Tell me Starship is still happen

[Anonymous No.11531425]

>>11531406
Yeh, SN1 took 4 weeks to build and SN3 took 3 weeks

The failure just feels like a huge setback if you checked construction site photos daily, but that time is nothing in terms of rocket development timescales

I just hope SN3 didn't fail because of stupidity. Like if they didn't realize a full tank on top of a sub atmospheric pressure tank would be a problem.

[Anonymous No.11531433]

>>11531425
Isn't SN4 half done anyway?
Please tell me something good bros

[Anonymous No.11531445]

>>11531433
Pretty much ready for the stacc senpai.

[Anonymous No.11531453]

>>11531406
>>11531422
>>11531425
>>11531433
Isn't this whole thing with Starship pretty similar to what the earliest Atlas rockets were going through?

With that in mind, I'm pretty confident they'll be able to get something going well for them soon. There's only been three prototypes and this error had more to do with the actual test being botched than the actual prototype.

[Anonymous No.11531457]

>>11531433
Could be done in 2-3 weeks if the past is anything to go by

It might get scaled back though like SN2. I'd imagine it needs to pass SN3's test before they risk component meant for high altitude tests

[Anonymous No.11531576]

>>11531235
You called?

[Anonymous No.11531593]

>Late January report that James Webb has a 12% chance of launching by March 2021
>Wuhan flu probably going to delay it even more

I hate China so much.
How when do you guys think it will launch?

[Anonymous No.11531601]

>>11531593
Some time after hell has frozen over.

[Anonymous No.11531603]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHA CAN MUSKLETS EVER RECOVER?!

[Anonymous No.11531615]

>>11531235
solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry

[Anonymous No.11531617]

current SN4 assembly diagram

[Anonymous No.11531637]

*implodes*

Lol spacex add pressure gauge huh

[Anonymous No.11531685]

>>11531617
Hmm I seem to remember there was way more than that. Maybe I'm going schizo looking at too many water towers.

[Anonymous No.11531759]

>>11531262
Who needs an Ozone layer, really, if you can have American jobs.

[Anonymous No.11531761]

>>11531422
They can shit these out in a month. Every failure is a delay of one single month.

[Anonymous No.11531767]

>>11531576
What a meme machine.

[Anonymous No.11531770]

>>11531593
>a 12% chance
Wow. So what was the actual date anyway?

[Anonymous No.11531801]

>>11531770
2045, conservatively

[Anonymous No.11531804]

So.
Turns out SLS is our only hope.
We're never getting off this rock, are we?

[Anonymous No.11531819]

>>11531593
>>11531770
>>11531801
The GAO report’s prediction about meeting the launch target was proven obsolete when NASA announced in January they had actually actually gained a sizeable amount of schedule margin since the report was made (in September 2019). However, it will be delayed like literally everything else due to CV-19. Work on JWST still continues at this moment, just at a reduced rate.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=cO-zo5z7oxQ

[Anonymous No.11531823]

>>11531770
March 30, 2021 is the current official launch date and has been since June 2018.
The previous launch date was May 2020.

This new report about a 12% chance of launch was released by the Government Accountability Office on Jan 28th.
Here's a short article about it:
https://www.space.com/nasa-james-webb-space-telescope-grim-gao-report.html

And here's the whole document of the report:
https://www.gao.gov/assets/710/704078.pdf

[Anonymous No.11531869]

>>11531823
>This new report about a 12% chance of launch was released by the Government Accountability Office on Jan 28th.

Why bother posting a report which is already known to be obsolete?

>“JWST was making good progress toward its planned launch date in March 2021 prior to the pandemic. There is a 52-day reserve.”

[Anonymous No.11531880]

>>11531425
remember those things are supposed to stand on mars for like a year, with a heavy payload on top, then lounch, fly back to earth, reenter the atmosphere and land, all without blowing up and killing everyone. a depressurised tank should be an absolutely non issue in any case.

[Anonymous No.11531890]

>>11531880
Its a depressurised tank with like 550t on liquid nitrogen of top of it. This is not any kind of normal operating mode.

[Anonymous No.11531908]

>>11531890
oh i didn't know the top tank was THAT heavy when full. my apologies

[Anonymous No.11531942]

>>11531804

As long there is Soyuz, LEO is a certainty.

[Anonymous No.11531943]

>>11531942
>As long there is Soyuz
No more hypergolics. Soyuz is no more.

[Anonymous No.11531947]

>>11531908
It wouldn't normally be anywher near that heavy when full, liquid nitrogen is substantially heavier than methane.

[Anonymous No.11531948]

>>11531943

WTF, Soyuz runs on Kerolox, not hypergolics. You must confuse it with those Chink Longmarches or with the Proton-M.

[Anonymous No.11531957]

>>11531948
Yeah, don't mind me today, I'm going full retard.
There was some shit about Kazakhstan no longer allowing any hypergolics to be launched from Baikonur, so my brain is just sending out wrong signals.

[Anonymous No.11531970]

>>11531957
>There was some shit about Kazakhstan no longer allowing any hypergolics to be launched from Baikonur

There is an agreement between Russia and the Kazakhstan government that they won’t launch hypergolic-fuelled rockets after 2023. That’s one of the main reasons for Proton being phased out in favour of Angara.

[Anonymous No.11531974]

>>11531970
Yeah, like I said, I'm having brain farts.

[Anonymous No.11532010]

>>11531325
That shit is a big fat nothing burger. Enjoy your fear mongering government power grab timeline. Be more worried about the flu and TB.

[Anonymous No.11532037]

>>11531617
Won't they just reuse the SN3 nose?

[Anonymous No.11532056]

>>11531880
>remember those things are supposed to stand on mars for like a year, with a heavy payload on top

Lol why would they never remove the payload from the rocket if they took it to Mars? You’re an idiot.

[Anonymous No.11532063]

>>11531947
If there were five kilograms of flies flying around in a 500 ton methane tank, would the tank weigh 500 tons and five kilograms or five hundred tons?

[Anonymous No.11532066]

>>11532063
500 tons and 5 kilograms.

[Anonymous No.11532217]

>>11531880
>depressurised tank

The point wasn't that it was empty though, It could have been lower pressure that the atmosphere. Even thick as fuck tanks can't survive pressures approaching vacuum, I'm sure you've seen that video of the train cart tanker being emptied of air.

Also mars has a thinner atmosphere so there's that going for us

[Anonymous No.11532235]

Can we just call them BleveX now?
(yes I know this was actually an implosion, blivi just doesn't sound as cool)

[Anonymous No.11532236]

>>11531453
I'd so no because I think the rocket your talking about couldnt' stand up while empty, starship can

Starship could've failed just by filling the tanks in a configuration that would never be used

[Anonymous No.11532243]

>>11532236
So are you arguing for or against starship?

[Anonymous No.11532245]

>>11531880
reminder that all rockets that have ever been made are constantly one tiny thing away from imploding or exploding. They're all stupidly fragile, Starship is no exception.

[Anonymous No.11532258]

>>11532243
I thought he was asking about this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imkdz63agHY

I wasn't arguing for any point. But if you want to know a rocket that can stand up empty is vastly better than one that can't. And a rocket failing under conditions it'll never encounter in operation either by accident or on purpose isn't a problem. I just hope that's whats going on.

[Anonymous No.11532264]

>>11532258
>I wasn't arguing for any point. But if you want to know a rocket that can stand up empty is vastly better than one that can't. And a rocket failing under conditions it'll never encounter in operation either by accident or on purpose isn't a problem. I just hope that's whats going on.
Alright, that's what it sounded like.

I honestly think Starship's in a pretty good place right now. Obviously it's still untested as shit but the fact that Musk is really pushing for constant prototyping and testing is a damn good thing. The fact that they're doing that and seeing what works and what doesn't is showing that they're at least making progress and moving forward, unlike so many others in the space exploration game. And like I said, there's been all of three prototypes. When it's been like two years and they still can't manage to get a ship out in orbit, then that's when I'd start worrying.

[Anonymous No.11532270]

>>11531235
Has Spacex done any designs on the interior of the ship let

[Anonymous No.11532300]

>>11532270
They exist. I remember hearing a space journalist, maybe Berger, talk about how spacious the concepts are.

[Anonymous No.11532331]

>>11532300
oh really , cool, i dont think i can appreciate the scale of it from pictures

[Anonymous No.11532448]

>>11532300
>spacious

[Anonymous No.11532564]

>>11532448
It's literally a room in space, how much more spacious can it get?

[Anonymous No.11532586]

Why isn't NASA helping with Starship? It's not like Starship means that SLS has no job at all. Maybe NASA uses Starship for only cargo and SLS for only crew you know. Its weird that they are barely acknowledging Starship, that's all.

>Starship carries a NASA lander to Gateway
>SLS launches an Orion, which rendezvous with the lander, and touches down on the moon.

I know that''s not Starship's goal, but still, I don't see why Nasa isn't seizing this opportunity.

>Superheavy with expendable second stage (Just Starship with only vacuum engines, now wings or heat shield)
>Second stage is fueled in LEO and is given a Transhab by a later Atlas V launch.
>SLS launched into LEO with an Orion and supplies.
>Starship/Transhab/Orion stack departs LEO for Mars.
>Starhip has enough fuel to break into Mars Orbit after.
>No need for NASA to study NTR.

An expendable SS/SH, at a cost of less than $500 Million, an place more into LEO than SLS or any current rocket design that's being assembled, yet no one seems to be helping SpaceX at all.

>Long March 9 BTFO
>Azncels crying

[Anonymous No.11532594]

>>11532586
>Why isn't NASA helping with Starship?
It's not in the budget. NASA isn't given a pile of money by Congress to do what they want, every single dollar given to NASA is specifically marked to whatever specific project Congress wants.

[Anonymous No.11532596]

>>11532586
>Why isn't NASA helping with Starship?
two completely different design methodologies. SpaceX is relying on NASA to build all the ISRU shit and EVA suits and vehicles and all the peripherals, so it's not like they aren't working towards a common goal, but NASA and SpaceX could never collaborate on a design and engineering basis—they're too different.

[Anonymous No.11532597]

>>11532586
Because NASA doesn't work that way.
NASA draws up a list of specs for something they want, then they send out bids. This isn't something NASA wants, this is Elon's pet project.

[Anonymous No.11532608]

>>11532586
>Why isn't NASA helping with Starship?

They are, a bit:

>SpaceX of Hawthorne, California, $3 million

>SpaceX will collaborate with NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, to develop and test coupler prototypes – or nozzles – for refueling spacecraft such as the company’s Starship vehicle. A cryogenic fluid coupler for large-scale in-space propellant transfer is an important technology to aid sustained exploration efforts on the Moon and Mars.

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-announces-new-tipping-point-partnerships-for-moon-and-mars-technologies

[Anonymous No.11532612]

Musklets seething

[Anonymous No.11532625]

>>11532586
If Starship flies to orbit, that means SLS is no more. NASA has spent more than $24 billion so far on SLS alone so far. They will need to spend another $20 billion for 2024 launch. Starship just needs to launch to orbit to make SLS obsolete. Imagine the fall out from Starship launching to orbit. I'm not even talking about refueling or reusability or price. The fact that a private company has surpassed NASA's own design will create a huge fall out within the industry. No one in the organization wants to touch Starship because they know the implication of it.

[Anonymous No.11532627]

>>11532625
>wishful thinking

[Anonymous No.11532695]

>>11532627
Not that guy, but the politican that can still manage to fund SLS after starship is flying to LEO on a regular base should be given a medal for best conman in the world.

[Anonymous No.11532700]

>>11532695
Congress can still lean on the fact that SLS can send payloads directly to TLI while Starship would require LEO refueling which represents an incredibly unsafe part of the mission.

[Anonymous No.11532704]

>>11532700
I should add. It's not that refueling itself is dangerous, but it can be interpreted by Congress as dangerous.

[Anonymous No.11532753]

Really Elon, again?

[Anonymous No.11532756]

>>11531908
The thing when fueled will weigh over 1000 tons

[Anonymous No.11532759]

>>11532753
what did he do this time? Cucking johnny depp or delivering the wrong kind of ventilator or something else?

[Anonymous No.11532761]

>>11532759
Had sex with a loli and has fled the country

[Anonymous No.11532769]

>>11532753
His a manic depressive isnt he

u r o k

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1246399264349184000?s=20

[Anonymous No.11532785]

>>11532056
>what are the cabins, life support, every part of the starship which is needed to bring humans to Mars?
>calls other people idiot.
kek

[Anonymous No.11532793]

>>11532608
Money from a government agency is merely payment for all the headache you go through dealing with the government agency
It’s not free money

[Anonymous No.11532794]

>>11532245
no rocket which has ever been made was ever supposed to survive the tasks starship is supposed to do

[Anonymous No.11532816]

>>11532700
>Congress can still lean on the fact that SLS can send payloads directly to TLI while Starship would require LEO refueling which represents an incredibly unsafe part of the mission.
Wrong.

Starship without refueling, without reusable, even costing $1B per launch will have more TLI than SLS. Current SpaceX Starship userguide has no TLI because they're designing it with full reusability. But even without it, they'll launch more.

[Anonymous No.11532839]

>>11532753
the front fell off.

[Anonymous No.11532922]

>>11531457
That exponential rate of progress trend though, hnngh

[Anonymous No.11532955]

>>11532596
When spaceX has less things to worry about I wish they would get into space suits, specifically those compression ones that are never going to leave research money toilets

[Anonymous No.11532970]

>>11532586
>An expendable SS/SH, at a cost of less than $500 Million
Expendable SSH would be stripped down and even cheaper to build than the fully reusable version, I doubt it'd cost more than a Falcon Heavy. That's for ~250 tons to LEO btw, and something in excess of 80 tons TLI.

[Anonymous No.11532980]

>>11532700
I think the refueling in orbit is just so it can land on the moon and launch back to earth. You don't need to for a fly-by

[Anonymous No.11533024]

>>11532700
You don't get it. The full Starship Superheavy stack, with reusable upper and lower stages, will cost less to build and launch than SLS. If you launch this same design in expendable mode, you don't get 100 tons to LEO anymore, you actually get ~250 tons. Now, consider that there's no way SpaceX is gonna bother installing all the fancy and heavy reusability hardware onto any Starship that is bought and paid for to fly expendable, so the actual mass to orbit figures will go up, and the cost (compared to expendable reusable Starship) will go down.
Sure, fully reusable Starship will undercut every other launch system by orders of magnitude. Even without reusability though, just based on how pricey it'd need to be to make money flying in expendable mode, Starship Superheavy will still blow the fuck out of SLS. It won't even be close. People forget that Starship ain't a 100 ton to LEO design, it's a 250+ ton to LEO rocket that devotes about 150 tons worth of performance to being reusable.

For expendable Starship to be equal to SLS on a cost per kilogram basis, it would need to cost ~$4 billion to $5 billion per launch. There's just no way the numbers work out to make Starship SH that expensive. SSH blows the fuck out of SLS, to an even greater degree than how Falcon Heavy blew the fuck out of Delta IV Heavy (FH costs less than 1/3rd the price but puts more payload onto EVERY trajectory less energetic than solar system escape velocity, despite DIV-H's meme hydrogen propellant).

[Anonymous No.11533036]

>>11532756
*Over 1300 tons, it carries at least 1200 tons of methalox propellants and has a dry mass of at least 100 tons of mostly steel.
Starship is likely approaching a design wet mass of 1500 tons, because it's been stretched more since the last time we were fed any numbers from Elon.

[Anonymous No.11533047]

>>11532785
Not likely to weigh 100+ tons. Most cargo mass on manned flights will be food and other consumables, and recyclables like water and gasses.
Also, this is only for manned missions with 100 people or so, which won't be happening within a decade of the first manned missions, because there really needs to be a robust base installed on Mars first in order to provide ample support to pulses of population increase like that.

[Anonymous No.11533053]

>>11532970
Just imagine a space station build with modules made from expandable uperstage starships.
>250 tons
>9m diameter
>up 15 m in length
One module would have more space then ISS, and the entire ISS is 450tons.
Now think of a shitload of modules docked together ISS style with solarpannels, robotic arms, docking stations, etc...
All with different purposes, from hydroponics to recreation to experimental zero G production lines where they could make revolutionary chemical bonds not possible on earth, etc...
It's is said that carbon nanotubes cables would be a lot easier to make in low gravity, we could do the necessary breakthroughs for orbital elevators in space.

Gets me hard to think about it.

[Anonymous No.11533069]

>>11531235

[Anonymous No.11533079]

>>11533053
Big waste of resources desu.

[Anonymous No.11533084]

>>11533079
everything about space is speculative. There is no concrete path to profitability or benefiting humanity through space exploration. We just need to waste resources until it stops being a waste—there is no other way forward.

[Anonymous No.11533105]

>>11533069
I believe it’s NSF’s render actually, so it was them not NG who fucked up. This render by NG is accurate.

[Anonymous No.11533155]

>>11533053
>It's is said that carbon nanotubes cables would be a lot easier to make in low gravity
What, like some kind of prophecy? That's retarded. I've heard that some substances, specifically metallic glasses, are much easier to produce in zero G, but not carbon nanotubes.

[Anonymous No.11533182]

>>11532769

[Anonymous No.11533197]

>>11533155
they're probably thinking of zblan which yes is best made in 0g, but they're pretty niche and aren't really economically viable to justify mass production in space

[Anonymous No.11533209]

>>11533197
Its got much higher transmission bandwidth and lower transmission losses than conventional glass fiber. If it was affordable, it would be highly desirable for telecommunications and lasers.

[Anonymous No.11533230]

>>11533209
>If it was affordable

[Anonymous No.11533245]

>>11533230
Which it could be, if you can mass produce it in space.

[Anonymous No.11533265]

>>11532596
At this rate all NASA will be doing is providing the suits and buying some seats to tag along with elons chosen colonists. They have already been approached by several heavy plant manufacturers, I assume they will sell spacex modified diggers, dozers etc.... ISRU essentially boils down to a box with electrodes in it to split your water and a box with a catalyst in it to sabatier your fuel. They won't be paying 9000 gorillion dollars to NASA for that. Tesla almost certainly has some plans drawn up for a rover type machine and the boring company just has to drop a tbm on Mars for instant habitats.

[Anonymous No.11533268]

>>11532608
>SLS
>Haha money printer go brrrrrrrr
>starship
>Money printer broke, here's some pocket money

[Anonymous No.11533277]

Was this the most kino rocket failure of all time?

[Anonymous No.11533278]

>>11532785
>cabins

Foam filled plastic moldings, less than 5 tonnes

>life support

Oxygen scrubber and water recycler, less than two tonnes

>every part of starship

Wash facilities, galley, gimballed chair/folding bed in cabins. Less than 5 tonnes

[Anonymous No.11533284]

the fact that normies and old space boomers don't understand iterative development and every failure is an excuse to scream "Starship is over" to them makes me sad

[Anonymous No.11533286]

>>11532448
Compared to his expectations, at least. It's not like everyone on board is gonna be getting a standard studio apartment.

[Anonymous No.11533295]

>>11532785
>what are the cabins, life support, every part of the starship which is needed to bring humans to Mars?

Not a hundred fucking tons

[Anonymous No.11533298]

>>11533284
There's a reason why NASA is so failurephobic today.

[Anonymous No.11533315]

>>11532448
You'll probably get a decent size cabins on one of the first synods when they only send 20 dudes or so. When they start sending a hundy you will get a cabin with a chair for launch/re entry that folds into a bed and a little room on the floor, that's it. Personally I would be happy with a coffin hotel style cuck shed for 3-6 months, anything to get there.

[Anonymous No.11533318]

>>11533245
If you could mass produce it in space and transport it back to Earth for cheap, you mean. That's a really big IF.

[Anonymous No.11533325]

>>11533298
It's a vicious cycle.
They're afraid of failure so they spend more studying every possible little thing in order to minimize failure.
Thus they get used to mission cost being very very high, which means they are even more afraid that the mission may fail.
SpaceX on the other hand has a guy in charge that wants a robust finished product more than he wants to not ever have a failure of design or hardware. Problems are found, fixed, and overcome quickly. No fear of failure. Fear of making a dumb mistake, sure, but not of failure.

[Anonymous No.11533346]

>>11533298
I mean, it's understandable because the weight of national pride is on their shoulders. SpaceX doesn't have that.

[Anonymous No.11533355]

>>11533325
There's also the case being that most people don't pay attention to space flight, and are only aware of it either when something succeeds or fails. When one is pushing the boundaries of what's possible, failure is much more common.

[Anonymous No.11533362]

>>11533346
They have been taking a shit on national pride since the end of apollo.

[Anonymous No.11533365]

>no boca chica webms ITT
That is the only reason I'm here.

[Anonymous No.11533367]

>>11533315
A little 2 cu. meter cabin would be just fine. With that, you're maximizing common area without depriving people of personal space.

[Anonymous No.11533373]

>>11533277
The controlled explosion of that falcon 9 a while back was kina as fuck but technically not a failure, but otherwise it would probably be up there with the best.

[Anonymous No.11533374]

>>11533365
"clear increased risk" is a few extra cases of cancer over the baseline.

[Anonymous No.11533394]

>>11533367
>2 cu. meter cabin
That's a fucking broom closet or double-wide coffin. Like literally.

[Anonymous No.11533436]

>>11533394
Which is enough to read or sleep or masturbate in

[Anonymous No.11533443]

>>11533436
>ywn have a private masterbatorium on Mars

[Anonymous No.11533445]

gateway foundation put out a new video with some neat visuals:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ6wwA9wXog
although they renamed their hypothetical space station from Von Braun to "Voyager" which is pretty lame

[Anonymous No.11533450]

>>11533443
If it's a scientific mission, would they have a dedicated team to retrieve all of the ejected genetic material for data collection?

[Anonymous No.11533457]

Reminder that watching porn is extremely unhealthy and you should just get a girlfriend.

[Anonymous No.11533468]

>>11533445
I recommend just watching on 2x speed and turning the sound off... it's a pretty terrible video

[Anonymous No.11533474]

>>11533457
>just be yourself bro

i just got out of a relationship because i was fucking tired of being somebody i'm not while she got to act out every fucking emotion that popped in her head.

[Anonymous No.11533478]

>>11533450
>sample collector's reaction when they have to clean anon's masterbatorium after 9 months of travel from Earth to Mars

[Anonymous No.11533479]

>>11533474
Okay now get a new relationship

[Anonymous No.11533480]

>>11533445
>design has zero room for any more expansion or new rings

[Anonymous No.11533484]

>>11533445
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrzVpvtsFf0

[Anonymous No.11533491]

>>11533484
Holy moly that one's audio got butchered. Give this one a go, Anons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gmf4OVHhc9g

[Anonymous No.11533494]

>>11533374
In addition to that you can cut down on radiation exposure SIGNIFICANTLY by using the mass of your cargo as shielding during transit and using underground sleeping quarters on Mars.

[Anonymous No.11533495]

>>11533445
I was watching some video on their site and they keep talking about just buying equipment directly from nasa contractors

And like wow that’s how you end up spending billions on dogshit
Also like 30 dream chasers as emergency escape vehicles? What the fuck is that

[Anonymous No.11533515]

>>11533479
The only girl that's going to touch me now is corona-chan.

[Anonymous No.11533521]

>>11533494
Only saw one obscure dude on youtube ever bring this up, but methane is actually a decent absorber of radiation, not as good as hydrogen but close. So if you point the fuel tank at the solar radiation no one gets cooked by a CME, and if you sleep right next to it that's almost half the directions the background radiation came come from blocked.

[Anonymous No.11533539]

>>11533515
Not with that attitude beta male

[Anonymous No.11533549]

>>11533521
The thing is:
You spend about half the time in your sleeping quarters and require rather little space there.
You could use your water tank and other supplies/equipment as shielding against radiation protecting you to nearly 100% for roughly 50% of the time.
Now during flight you can extend that by staying in bed longer and just going out for exercise, so 75-80% less radiation during transit.
On Mars you could potentialy build structures underground or cover them with huge quantities of sand/rocks/whatever you can find and cut down radiation exposure there to basicl, only when you are outside.

That way you would have cut down radiation exposure to a level that I would consider acceptable for a once in a lifetime mission of consenting adults.
Keep in mind that many people, including me, would accept getting exposed to radiation to a certain degree that raises our risk of cancer to a measureable degree for a mission like that.
To be honest, I've done stuff that was more likely of killing me than the expected radiation dose from such a mission.

[Anonymous No.11533580]

>>11533445
>renamed their hypothetical space station from Von Braun to "Voyager"
Pathetic

[Anonymous No.11533593]

>>11533457
Really, truly, a revolting concept.

[Anonymous No.11533603]

>>11533593
Actual 4Chan goblin here folks. Green warty nose and all

[Anonymous No.11533621]

>>11533580
The design looks like a total useless meme too

[Anonymous No.11533622]

>>11533445
scam station
are they actually doing something?

[Anonymous No.11533623]

>>11533445
>named Voyager
>doesn't go on voyages
LAME

[Anonymous No.11533666]

>>11533622
they're keeping at least one 3D modeler employed part time

[Anonymous No.11533685]

>>11533666
Based.
i wonder how many retards have donated to this scam.
And wtf is this donating culture anyway?
how loaded are these people that they can throw their money at camwhores, kickstarters, etc...
Fucking dead end losers.

[Anonymous No.11533703]

>>11533685
>how loaded are these people that they can throw their money at camwhores, kickstarters, etc...
I'd figure "not very" at this ponit.

[Anonymous No.11533715]

>>11533580
They probably did it because Von Braun worked in the SS, so presenting it would've resulted in a bunch of long nosed politicians to get twitter aspies to scream "NADZIIIIEEEEEE" or something.

[Anonymous No.11533717]

>>11533715
That's what I'm disgusted by. Cowardice.

[Anonymous No.11533723]

>>11533715
i like that von braun was so influential to our history that not even the jews cant write him out of it.

[Anonymous No.11533725]

>>11533685
>how loaded are these people that they can throw their money at camwhores, kickstarters, etc...

Imagine spending excess income on anything but the college fund of your brood.

[Anonymous No.11533754]

>>11533725
Imagine sending your brood to college and not having them get a trade.

[Anonymous No.11533774]

>>11533549
>That way you would have cut down radiation exposure to a level that I would consider acceptable for a once in a lifetime mission of consenting adults.

I wish the acceptable meme would die though but that would never fly with modern nasa. Fact is mars is a "suicide mission" that requires military badasses with apollo levels of risk tolerance. Billions of people have died for way lamer shit at every point in human history up to today. I wish I could say I'm talking about epic voyages across a continent or across the sea to start a new life, but sometimes routine passenger flights just fucking disappear in the 21st century. Daily life isn't free, let alone conquering frontiers. Losing a few dudes who would rather die failing than die a forgotten life is a low price. The real price is knowing you lacked the ability to succeed. I just don't want to hear we aren't going to mars because an astronaut might die, the only good reason not to go to mars is we can't do it.

[Anonymous No.11533776]

>>11533685
i should open up donations. just gotta use my skills to create a spaceflight website, drop a donation link, and collect the shekels. ill need a goal though, like putting a cubesat into orbit.

[Anonymous No.11533787]

>>11533715
I was right. I saw some jooz going "VON BRAUN WAS A NUDZIEE SO HE BAD!"

[Anonymous No.11533828]

>>11533754
Some people are destined for more than trade work.

[Anonymous No.11533834]

>>11533828
>implying you need a 150k$ piece of paper to achieve great things

Boomer detected

[Anonymous No.11533840]

>>11533834
You do if you want to be any sort of scientist or astronaut or engineer or medical worker.

[Anonymous No.11533855]

>>11533840
Your kids might as well give up on being astronauts if they have to go through NASA. If spacex succeeds then blue collars will be getting the first pick because they need skilled tradespeople, desk jockeys can work from earth.

[Anonymous No.11533901]

>>11533855
Trade schools cost money, too. What they don’t use, I can spend on shitty whiskey.

[Anonymous No.11533988]

>>11533901
Imagine going to trade school and not getting an apprenticeship lmao.

[Anonymous No.11533993]

>>11533988
imagine going to a university and not getting a full ride scholarship

[Anonymous No.11534005]

Imagine not marrying an older wealthy woman

[Anonymous No.11534007]

>>11533265
It would be delicious to watch NASA scrambling to associate itself with Starship and pretend they were fully behind it all along once it became clear a Mars mission was on

[Anonymous No.11534037]

>>11533993
Not achievable if you're white, try to keep up boomer.

[Anonymous No.11534072]

>>11533457
>unhealthy
Source?

>girlfriend
Did you just assume?

[Anonymous No.11534094]

>>11533443
What's stopping some private astronaut from going up into space and then explicitly tweeting or something "I am going to be the first man to cum in space" and then actually doing it. He would get all the glory of being the first man to masturbate in space. If NASA wanted to take the glory, they would have to admit that they kept it secret for all these years and tarnish their image, so they would stay silent.

[Anonymous No.11534109]

>It's 2055, there's several major cities on Mars.
>A spaceport in the asteroid belt to start tapping into its riches
>Lunar bases operate new observatories and refineries
>SpaceX put out a new line of BFRs with microfission NTRs for void travel
>The old Mk. Is are on the surplus market for cheap
>You and several good friends buy a Mk. I and lift off of Earth
>Mars is becoming wealthy from being a big shipyard/fuel depot
>Some Mk I's have been retrofitted with the new void NTRs
>Earth's governments are being jews and putting on trade restrictions
>Mars is debating secession from Earth
Where will you go?

[Anonymous No.11534125]

>>11534109
Titan

[Anonymous No.11534136]

>>11533828
>>11533840
Not the ones getting any degree with the word "studies" in it. STEM or a trade, anything else is a waste of money. I'd even consider an art or music degree as acceptable if you're learning something you can apply to a paying job.
>>11533776
The thing is, getting a cubesat up is easier these days than you would think. You might as well do it like the pros, ask for twice what it costs, launch some stupid useless zoomer toy sat with animu mascot marketing and tchotkes for whales (remember, this is the generation that will buy cassette tapes without a working player), then pocket the rest of the cash.
>>11533901
But trade schools don't force you to take English classes and other unrelated shit to get your degree.
>>11534005
imagine a wealthy woman who is even willing to marry someone that makes less than her, or at least one child-bearing age
>>11534094
>and then actually doing it
shitposting from space is the future

[Anonymous No.11534275]

>>11533394
In zero G two cubic meters means you have 81 square feet of 'floor' space all to yourself.

[Anonymous No.11534320]

>>11533394
It would be like a couple decks of roughly wedge shaped capsule hotels. Zip up space sleeping bag, little unfolding screen, maybe some very compact little drawers for storing fresh clothes and personal effects.

[Anonymous No.11534332]

>>11534320
Very comfy. There will also be little windows on the exterior wall.

[Anonymous No.11534368]

>>11534332
The size for them is about right too, if Starship's circumference is 28.27m then if you wanted to create a single deck of cabins composed of 25 individual units, each unit would be 1.13m across, and if you wanted 100 crew you'd have four decks of them. Honestly though I think that would be a bit of a tight uncomfortable squeeze for some people. Personally if I were to design Starship I'd build it for 50 crew with each cabin being a truncated wedge about 2m wide at the top and 1.5m wide at the bottom. The cool thing about having so much space to work with too is that if you did somehow find a project big enough to need 100 people in space in the near future, if you build your bunks modular so 1m or 2m units could easily be hot swapped or have crew hotbunk (submarine crews do it for months at a time) you could still easily have a 100 person crew.

[Anonymous No.11534385]

>>11534368
Hotbunking would drive people crazy, these aren't trained and psych screened sub crew, they will be blue collars with a smattering of hands on scientists. People will need their personal space, even as small as that.

[Anonymous No.11534400]

>>11534385
True, although you probably will still need to give the crew some level of conditioning against claustrophobia. At least with a sub if there's some kind of emergency regarding the crew's mental state you can surface, can't be done at all in space, you're stuck in that can till you reach your destination.

[Anonymous No.11534434]

>>11534400
Just space those niggas, claustrophobic cunts ain't gonna make it.

[Anonymous No.11534617]

>>11534400
No will be sending random joes with no screening or training pat sub orbital space for a very very long time.

>>11534434
They’ll obviously be screened against claustrophobia why are people so concerned about the journey to Mars as if the claustrophobia ends when you get there. Permanent Mars colonists are not getting out for fresh air once they get there. They’ll be in fairly confined spaces for the the rest of their lives.

The Sub analogy is valid in that the crew has a future outside the Sub to look forward to in 9 months or whatever their deployment is but the Sub doesn’t surface doesn’t surface for uncomfortable crew.

[Anonymous No.11534649]

Why haven't we got nuclear rockets yet?

[Anonymous No.11534651]

>>11534649
People are a bit skeptical about firing anything nuclear off inside the atmosphere and there's not much going on outside our atmosphere since 1972, is there?

[Anonymous No.11534707]

>>11533277
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJP5ncnLwgE

[Anonymous No.11534709]

[Anonymous No.11534721]

>>11534709
Imagine the smell.

[Anonymous No.11534723]

>>11534709
is that really what the guts of a dalek looks like?

[Anonymous No.11534724]

>>11533394
I've spent days in a capsule hotel that was smaller.

[Anonymous No.11534737]

>>11534724
lmao ur a poor loser

[Anonymous No.11534747]

How do you bring a girl back to your place in space if it's only 2 cubic meters? You'd practically be laying on top of each other lol. How awkward haha!

[Anonymous No.11534812]

>>11533774
The real question is:
What is an acceptable risk?
Some say a risk of 50% would be acceptable, some say 10% and NASA probably won't even do shit at 5%.
They didn't do Apollo back in the day because it was easy, but because it was hard.
Plus all the safety regulations they now require for every manned launch vehicle didn't even apply to their shuttle that didn't even have a launch-abort system.

Just like many other industries, we're regulating spaceflight into its death.
It's not safe and it's not going to be totaly safe anytime soon, but so are 737 NG(not only MAX), cars and even walking.

[Anonymous No.11534818]

>>11534094
There was a certain heartrate anomaly during an Apollo mission when the spacecraft was behind the moon and the lander on the ground.
So I suppose that has allready been done.

[Anonymous No.11534828]

>>11531235
Is physics a good path (including grad school programs) or should I change my undergrad to engineering to get into space flight? I am also interested in cosmology/cosmogony research so idk what path to take yet,

[Anonymous No.11534830]

>>11534109
Cargo mission from Earth to lunar orbit to Mars to pay off the ship and fuel.
Then transporting steel from Mars to the belt for construction of the spaceport.
From the belt back to Mars transporting precious metals or working in the belt.

[Anonymous No.11534834]

>>11534649
The US government researched them heavily in the 50s and even made working systems but they’re stupid dangerous. Might be a better idea as a lunar launch system, nobody would care if a radioactive rocket exploded on an isolated region of the moon.

[Anonymous No.11534884]

>>11534812
Safetycucks get the rope, any risk is fine as long as its agreed to. I very much doubt its 50% even on a bad starship run out.

[Anonymous No.11534939]

>>11534275
>>11534320
>coffin cabins are a-ok
What are you some sort of apartment dweller cucks?

[Anonymous No.11534943]

>>11534709
>you can copy the entire diagram of this thing but you still couldn't make one like it because it's made from magic unobtanium
GET FUCKED CHINA!

[Anonymous No.11534944]

>>11534943
Wasn't a large portion of it 3D printed? Good luck copying that shit just from looking at the outside.

[Anonymous No.11534957]

what is it gonna be like a hundred people floating around in the middle of the ship lmao.

[Anonymous No.11534975]

>>11534072
>Source?

Oh shit it’s a coomer.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/1874574

Porn should be illegal.

[Anonymous No.11534977]

>>11534747
>How do you bring a girl back to your place in space if it's only 2 cubic meters? You'd practically be laying on top of each other lol. How awkward haha!

Sounds fun

[Anonymous No.11535016]

>>11534977
imagine floating outside and just get a face full of body fluids floating around lol

[Anonymous No.11535020]

>>11535016
Ever wondered why they always cut the stream from the ISS after spacewalks when they're about to come out of the suits?
Yeah, now you know why.

[Anonymous No.11535038]

>>11535016
A piece of shit got loose in the Apollo missions.

[Anonymous No.11535049]

>>11535038
That sounds like a shitty situation.

[Anonymous No.11535163]

>>11534828
more like cosmotology cuz youre gay lol

[Anonymous No.11535173]

>>11534939
>paying half a mil rather than 200k for your few month trip to Mars because you need some space to flail around on your Nintendo wii

>>11534957
People will be on shifts, around half will be asleep at any given time as well as neets that just want to fap, watch anime and chill en route. Probably around 30-40 people in common areas at any given time.

>>11534828
Change your bullshit ripoff """education""" to a trade, blue collars are going to make it in the event of real offworld expansion, pencil pushers are not.

[Anonymous No.11535180]

>>11535173
>going on a space ride
>not riding in style
I rarely ever fly, but when I do I rent a private jet.

[Anonymous No.11535207]

>>11535173
Watching anime and masturbating is degenerate.

[Anonymous No.11535215]

>>11535163
lmao

[Anonymous No.11535251]

>San Francisco-area rocket builder Astra recently cut its headcount to about 120 employees from about 150 (with the majority furloughed for 3 months), giving the company enough runway to last until first quarter 2021.

>RIP Astra Rocket 3.0 "1of3"

>"The company also recently lost one of its rockets in a fire during testing, the person said, with Astra not expecting to attempt another launch for a few months."

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/05/rocket-startup-astra-trims-staff-to-survive-pandemic-until-next-year.html

[Anonymous No.11535276]

>>11534957
>what is it gonna be like a hundred people floating around in the middle of the ship lmao.

Yeah this if I'm paying millions I want a one-on-one boyfriend experience with elon

[Anonymous No.11535548]

Thrust section is getting reused

[Anonymous No.11535565]

>>11535251
>Astra’s customers are worried about surviving this crisis themselves, the person said, with about half of its customers looking to pull out or at the very least renegotiate contracts.

Oof, it’s over Astrabros...how could we let the Rocket Chads dominate the small launch market?

[Anonymous No.11535573]

>>11534834
What about solar rockets?

[Anonymous No.11535590]

>>11535548
Nice! That should save a fuck ton of time, most of the electronics are on the bottom correct?>>11535573
Do you mean solar sails?

[Anonymous No.11535644]

Finally orbited the planet on Kerbal space program, with a ship of just 18 tonnes. It was difficult, barely had any fuel left for return journey but it was very satisfying. I can only imagine what those that work for space programs feel when they accomplish something,

[Anonymous No.11535651]

>>11535644
Underengineering in KSP is the best. Doing everything by hand without flight planning too.

[Anonymous No.11535670]

>>11535651
I can understand how difficult spaceflight is and why it takes so long for anything to be done.
You add something, the ship is too heavy, you take something you can`t reach the target or the safety margins, You have to keep testing, failing and trying like spacex does.

[Anonymous No.11535672]

>>11535573
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_thermal_rocket
???

[Anonymous No.11535674]

>>11535670
>You have to keep testing, failing and trying like spacex does.
If you have the money and time to do it that is. There's an old engineering adage that I'm misquoting, but it basically states that good engineering gets it right the very first time.

[Anonymous No.11535676]

>>11535672
Could be either solar thermal or solar electric in context. Solar Electric is more directly attainable with current tech.

[Anonymous No.11535689]

>>11535670
I got a friend of mine into KSP recently, so I streamed a bit for him to show him the basics. It was really satisfying to just slap together the most rickety piece of shit ever, put Jeb in it, launch, get in orbit and get a nice circular orbit with about 7s of burn left in my top stage, plenty left for reentry.
Everything done just by eyeballing it.

[Anonymous No.11535699]

I upgraded my buildings, does this remind you of something?

[Anonymous No.11535702]

>>11535689
Went for a two stage rocket for that, but i had`t upgraded my buildings so the limit was 18tonnes and 30 parts. It was difficult but very satisfying, expecially since you get to pilot the rocket yourself.

[Anonymous No.11535716]

please dont let this general become /kspg/ 2.0

[Anonymous No.11535723]

>>11535548
I don't believe that

[Anonymous No.11535724]

>>11535699
fix your staging

[Anonymous No.11535797]

>>11535723
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1246700305988943872

[Anonymous No.11535800]

>>11535797
I don't believe Elon

[Anonymous No.11535810]

>>11535251
How do you have customers before you’ve reached space?

[Anonymous No.11535811]

>>11534747
The advantage is plenty of walls to ensure momentum for completing the docking maneuvers.
>>11534818
Imagine holding the world record for cooming the farthest away from Earth, and nobody knows.

[Anonymous No.11535843]

>>11535548
Looks pretty warped. Not sure if that's a good idea.

[Anonymous No.11535886]

>>11535843
it's not going to fly, so as long as it's good enough to test it's whatever

[Anonymous No.11536051]

>>11535699
>picking copper color to anodize your aluminum rocket with
But why?

[Anonymous No.11536139]

>Starship on it's third failure
Came here to gloat.

[Anonymous No.11536148]

>>11536139

[Anonymous No.11536149]

>>11536148
>pointed out the shit welds
>just a fluke that it happened to blow up three times

[Anonymous No.11536153]

>>11536149
Two were due to shit welds. Third was a test configuration issue, where the welds actually held up well.

[Anonymous No.11536154]

>>11536149
>pointed out the iceberg

Do you want a sticker?

[Anonymous No.11536212]

>>11536154
Uhh yeah because /sci/ denied the welds were shit.

[Anonymous No.11536241]

In some ways I feel sorry for you all for believing in this comedy. I know we all want to go to Mars but you can't put your faith in joke projects like this

[Anonymous No.11536261]

>>11536149
Number 3 had good welds.

[Anonymous No.11536280]

>>11536241
i do believe that spacex will build a nice new rocket. they have proved again and again that they are capable of doing so. I doubt though that it will be even half as good as claimed and will probably take at least twice as long. maybe they will also rename it a few additional times.

[Anonymous No.11536295]

>>11536241
Imagine being a negative person. It must be a nightmare to be so small.

[Anonymous No.11536301]

>>11536139
>I’m a bad person

Okay.

[Anonymous No.11536308]

>>11536295
>>11536301
You all mindlessly support anything SpaceX does, that's why I gloat when something so obviously flawed yet heavily defended here predictably flopped completely

[Anonymous No.11536320]

>>11536280
Precisely my own view. they totallyc an build good rockets and put people in space but these outlandish claims of rockets an order of magnitude better than anything and cities on Mars that came before are just silly

[Anonymous No.11536327]

SN4 soon

[Anonymous No.11536331]

>>11536308
>You all mindlessly support anything SpaceX does
No. Everyone here who isn't an idiot makes fun of Elon time.

>when something so obviously flawed yet heavily defended here predictably flopped completely
What's so "obviously flawed" about Starship? By all means, share your thoughts.

[Anonymous No.11536409]

say something nice about astrobotic

[Anonymous No.11536413]

>>11535797
Sounds to me like they'll just pull some shit off it and duct tape it to the SN4 thrust section, not use the whole thing.

[Anonymous No.11536425]

>>11531325
starship, the SLS and the Artemis missions are all doomed. america will not get to the moon or mars.
china will be the foremost leader in moon and mars exploration

[Anonymous No.11536430]

>>11536409
That's an ingenious idea. Would it really work though?

[Anonymous No.11536433]

>During a visit to Cape Canaveral this week, NASA astronauts Doug Hurley and Bob Behnken strapped in to the SpaceX crew capsule they will ride into the sun in mid-to-late May

This is my brain without sleep.

[Anonymous No.11536449]

>>11536409
*falls in crater and cant get out*
nothin personell, kid

[Anonymous No.11536454]

>>11536425
as it should be. america is an atrocious nation, its an insult to the universe that it planted its flag on the moon when it has so much to answer for.

[Anonymous No.11536466]

>>11536308
>You all mindlessly support anything SpaceX does

Nope. Try trolling on /v/ or something

[Anonymous No.11536467]

>>11534944
Not really. Raptor is designed for rapid production, and while 3D printing is good for rapid prototyping, it's quite shit at churning out huge numbers of parts for production lines. Raptor is made almost entirely using traditional machining processes because they're faster and better.

[Anonymous No.11536470]

>>11536425
>starship, the SLS and the Artemis missions are all doomed. america will not get to the moon or mars.

Ah, yes. Because troll anon said so.
Kys

[Anonymous No.11536477]

>>11536430
yes but only until the first sharp rock and probably not in a way you expect

[Anonymous No.11536482]

>>11536425
China will balkanize before the end of 2020.

[Anonymous No.11536529]

>>11536470
its true. china is positioning themselves to come out of this economy stronger than before, and their space program has outpaced the US for about a decade and a half by now.
the era of US space dominance is over.

[Anonymous No.11536544]

>>11536529
You're only backing the case for banning China from the internet.

[Anonymous No.11536551]

>>11536529
>QUANTUM
>IMPRESSIVE

[Anonymous No.11536559]

>>11536212
So are you happy a water tower fell over or that someone on the internet was wrong?

[Anonymous No.11536563]

>>11536241
Fuck mars I'm rooting for this dog for cheap heavy lift

[Anonymous No.11536564]

>>11536544
why? so you can ignore the truth? china already owns that too by the way. chinese data centers control the internet and american companies do the CCPs bidding.

[Anonymous No.11536575]

>>11536529
Still weaker than before, but non-asian countries will be relatively weaker and that's their bottom line

[Anonymous No.11536588]

>>11536529
>Muh third world communist country is outpacing the US!!1111

Lol

[Anonymous No.11536621]

>>11536588
We're in economic shutdown that never been tried before, it could lead to a horrible depression

China has a highly organized control structure so they can work without starting a second outbreak

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfsdJGj3-jM

China is a crony capitalist 2nd world country. They recently stole the beneficial ideas of liberal democracies like technology and markets that they never could have developed while isolated. They are still behind per capita, but if they ever solved economics even a little more than they know now, they have the population to explode in power, at the same time the US could take a dive.

This has to be stopped. Take it seriously. You can't do shit but the public sentiment matters.

[Anonymous No.11536664]

>>11536621
China just told everyone to get back to work and just sweeps any cases under the rug.
Just stop testing for Corona and you won‘t have any more Corona deaths and Corona cases. Then you get to gloat how well your totalitarian regime managed everything with its laughably stupid measures like barricading people in their homes.

[Anonymous No.11536670]

>>11536621
its already too late for the US. its reaction to the virus will be the same for the impending economic devastation. the US will do nothing, and become a third world economy as a result. china on the other hand will become the top GDP and will go ahead with their many more space missions than the US.

[Anonymous No.11536680]

>>11536670
>the end is just around the corner!
OK

[Anonymous No.11536686]

>>11536680
its not around the corner, its already passed. china has already outpaced the west militarily, now it has done so economically.

[Anonymous No.11536694]

动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 肅清 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 活摘器官 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Winnie the Pooh 劉曉波动态网自由门

[Anonymous No.11536723]

>>11536694
>>>/k/
this board appears to be more your speed, my american friend.

i for one look forward to the day where american flags can no longer defile space.

[Anonymous No.11536724]

>>11536694
>implying it ever worked to repel chinks

[Anonymous No.11536727]

>>11536723
It seems you found a usable proxy, my human zerg friend

[Anonymous No.11536736]

>>11536664
This doesn't change anything about my point

The point is china restarted its economy and we aren't. Hell a bunch of old people continuing to die in china just increases their productivity. They no longer have to spend resources to keep them alive.

[Anonymous No.11536739]

>>11535590
>Do you mean solar sails?
A solar rocket uses a thin mirror to focus light onto a heat exchanger that you flow hydrogen through. It acts like a nuclear thermal rocket, and gets similar Isp, but worse thrust to weight ratio, and you can't use it past a certain distance from the Sun. Could be useful in specific situations someday (ie a dedicated Earth-Moon orbital ferry that never lands) but I'm not holding my breath.

[Anonymous No.11536761]

Treat bugmen shills the same way flat earthers are treated. Ignore them

[Anonymous No.11536762]

https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/niac/2018_Phase_I_Phase_II/PROCSIMA

Would this realistically work? If so, how would it be used?
Inner system station equiped with these beam spacecraft into the outer solar system and possibly as a stage for interstellar missions

>Inb4 NASA
If the concept is sound, then /sci/ r&d should wrestle it to work, it would be a great boon to beyond Earth spaceflight

[Anonymous No.11536768]

>>11535590
>Do you mean solar sails?
I think he meant this.
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist.php#solarmoth

[Anonymous No.11536792]

>>11536736
china's space program was leauges ahead of the US's before this as well.
china's flag will be the first to mars, and china will be the ones to conduct moon mining operations.

[Anonymous No.11536796]

>>11536792
>moon mining
you watch too much sci-fi wang

[Anonymous No.11536815]

>>11536449
They can take turns jumping to have the opposite sides lift upwards, like on swings. At some point, probably after a few jumps, they can start shifting their weight forward to provide inclination.

[Anonymous No.11536822]

>>11536621
The west was already pulling out of china before corona started.
Trump's trade war against china was really succesfull unlike what the media was claiming in the west.
And china is massively dependent on foreign food imports, partly because CCP has created several generations of people who are too retarded to do decent farming.
And china pretty much fucked themselfs in the ass by trying to play a monopoly on rare earth metals, the west has restarted mines all over the world and japan has started a mine that could pretty much suply the world for decades.
Then lets look at the fact that china is pretty much hated by every other nation in asia because of the south sea bullshit, on top of that the CCP downplaying this virus for at least 3 months backed by the WHO traitors has created a world wide pandemic.

If you think china is going to get out of this scot free then you're in for a surprise.

[Anonymous No.11536825]

>>11536409
>they took this from you

[Anonymous No.11536830]

>>11536425
>>11536454
Taiwan #1

[Anonymous No.11536840]

>>11536153
one was shit welds, another was niggerrigging it, and the third was fucking up the test configuration

[Anonymous No.11536849]

>>11536762
>will it work?
Not with that fucking backronym of a name, it won't.

[Anonymous No.11536870]

>>11536762
>The elimination of both diffraction and thermal spreading is achieved by tailoring the mutual interaction of the laser and particle beams so that (1) refractive index variations produced by the particle beam generate a waveguide effect (thereby eliminating laser diffraction) and (2) the particle beam is trapped in regions of high electric field strength near the center of the laser beam. By exploiting these phenomena simultaneously, we can produce a combined beam that propagates with a constant spatial profile, also known as a soliton.
What would happen if something intersects the beam's path for a few seconds when the probe is a few lightyears away? I know interstellar medium is rather empty, but still.

[Anonymous No.11536895]

>>11536563
Amen. All things follow from that first step.

[Anonymous No.11536905]

>>11536870
it either gets vaporized or accelerated, depending on size and composition

[Anonymous No.11536930]

>>11536830
taiwan is a joke. its own people are already willing for reunification because its government is such a massive US puppet. theyve already elected a pro-reunification president.

[Anonymous No.11536933]

>>11536905
But what it means for the probe? Surely the beam's disruption (particles colliding with the object crossing its path) will affect the beam's cohesion. Would the profiles disruption, even if it's so short, change the center of pressure applied to the probe? Since the distances are rather significant would it not result in the probe deviating off its course, ultimately? One billionth of a degree over billions of kilometers.

[Anonymous No.11536952]

>>11536723
>CHING CHING PING ZONG ZOAHWIE WONWEE PONGIE PEKING DUCK COWONA PING WONG WING WANG BRAP PRRRRRT
Lmao shut the fuck up

[Anonymous No.11536962]

>>11536930
>Taiwan News article from 6 days ago
>"Majority of Taiwanese support replacing 'Republic of China' with 'Taiwan' on passport cover"
Wrong again, wang.

[Anonymous No.11536965]

>>11536933
Would not appreciably affect steering. The probe itself would have some ability to alter the shape of its reflector in order to steer, anyway. The beam just needs to be there.

[Anonymous No.11536968]

Guys can we stop feeding the chine insects in this thread and get back to talking about relevant players in the space launch sector?

[Anonymous No.11536974]

>>11536930
>its own people are already willing for reunification
If they were, then they would quickly change their mind when they get Hong Kong'd.

[Anonymous No.11536982]

>>11536968
Alright, any updates on New Glenn? Are they still going to launch next year?

[Anonymous No.11536997]

>>11536982
they're still building a factory and building a launch pad
I haven't seen any updates from them in a while

[Anonymous No.11537004]

>>11536965
>appreciably
If not for your second point it would've been a problem over such distances.

>The probe itself would have some ability to alter the shape of its reflector in order to steer, anyway.
This should work.
Would it be hard for a probe to correctly estimate where the target is at a given moment while it's halfway between the stars with sufficient precision? To make the course correction, I mean. It does take some energy to alter course at relativistic speeds.
Also, how is the probe supposed to slow down?

[Anonymous No.11537014]

>>11537004
>how is the probe supposed to slow down
lol

[Anonymous No.11537028]

>>11537014
So you're saying we only send one tiny thing, pump propellant into it for 40 years, wait for it to beam back some tiny amount of data over like 10 more years and that's it?

[Anonymous No.11537030]

>>11537004
Using an engine or thruster of some kind
Without one, it's as useful as a bullet at those same distances

[Anonymous No.11537036]

>>11537028
>40 years
lol
>10 years
lol
400 years maybe, and 10 years absolutely

[Anonymous No.11537039]

>>11537030
Where to get the fuel? It was accelerating for years without having to carry the propellant with it.

[Anonymous No.11537044]

>>11537036
>400 years maybe
>>Compared with a diffracting laser beam, the PROCSIMA architecture increases the probe acceleration distance by a factor of ~10,000, enabling a payload capability of 1 kg for the 42-year mission to Proxima Centauri.

[Anonymous No.11537055]

>>11537030
>Without one, it's as useful as a bullet at those same distances
even traveling at .1c it can send back plenty of data in a flyby

[Anonymous No.11537056]

>>11536997
>mrw Blue Origin is still being very secretive about what they're doing

[Anonymous No.11537059]

>>11537044
>payload capability of 1 kg
you won't even be able to get a signal back from a payload that small

[Anonymous No.11537074]

>>11536962
because taiwan is a province, moron.

[Anonymous No.11537075]

>>11537056
money laundering no doubt.

[Anonymous No.11537082]

>>11536327
SOON

[Anonymous No.11537084]

>>11537074
Ching chong ping pang, me rike eat doggu

[Anonymous No.11537089]

>>11537004
>Also, how is the probe supposed to slow down?

Any beam-powered craft can decelerate using the same beam it used to accelerate using a mirror.

[Anonymous No.11537095]

>>11537039
>Where to get the fuel? It was accelerating for years without having to carry the propellant with it.

Bussard Ramjets can be used to decelerate

[Anonymous No.11537097]

>>11537089
I thought it might be possible but couldn't think of an actual solution until now for some reason.

[Anonymous No.11537099]

>>11537039
It carries the propellant with it as part of the payload, the beam just means it can carry less
>>11537055
But less than a probe in system
And useless if you want to send an exploration ship or even a colony ship to another system

[Anonymous No.11537106]

>>11537099
it has to weigh as much as a postage stamp to reach .1c, anon. It's doing a flyby at that speed and there's no modern technology that can do any better.

[Anonymous No.11537108]

>>11536815
I'm more interested in how the fuck they see shit in this thing

[Anonymous No.11537112]

>>11537099
>It carries the propellant with it as part of the payload, the beam just means it can carry less
How much propellant would it need? For Proxima.

[Anonymous No.11537146]

>no /sfg/ representative on the /sci/ 4cc team
simply unamerican

[Anonymous No.11537150]

>>11537106
>it has to weigh as much as a postage stamp to reach .1c, anon.

Just use particle beams or bigger lasers lol

[Anonymous No.11537164]

does anybody have any more Shelbys
I'll post what I have

[Anonymous No.11537167]

>>11537164

[Anonymous No.11537169]

>>11537146
Who is this toad looking guy

[Anonymous No.11537177]

>>11537167

[Anonymous No.11537184]

>>11537169
Senator Richard Shelby is YOUR Senator for Alabama and head of the Senate Appropriation Committee
Responsible for keeping Spaceflight American and Supporting American Jobs in America, safely returning Americans to Space on American Rockets like SLS (praise be upon it)

[Anonymous No.11537190]

>>11537169
The piece of shit who took US spaceflight away from us.

[Anonymous No.11537192]

>>11536621
China doesn't even have any plans for a manned Lunar mission, in any sort of capacity and likely won't for 10+ years. They're still figuring out LEO.

I'm not saying we should just rest on our laurels but we're definitely still ahead.

[Anonymous No.11537208]

>>11537192
>China doesn't even have any plans for a manned Lunar mission
I thought that they want to put someone on the moon by 2030?

[Anonymous No.11537227]

>>11537208
>I thought that they want to put someone on the moon by 2030?
I just looked it up and you're right. Even still, we plan on putting people on the Moon again by 2024 anyhow.

[Anonymous No.11537246]

>>11537208
That’s vague as hell

[Anonymous No.11537388]

>>11533484
>>11533491
Jesus, i can't believe the first one is the one I've been listening to this whole time. Who the fuck put that version on their greatest hits cd? (No that distortion is not from Youtube)

[Anonymous No.11537408]

>>11534709
Look at all those goodies in the background.
>Even iterating on pallet design

[Anonymous No.11537411]

>>11534943
TBF, the US was like that with the RD-180s, weren't we?

[Anonymous No.11537413]

>>11537411
ULA was like that with RD-180 yeah

[Anonymous No.11537420]

>>11536327
Jesus, I stop checking for 2 days and they already have 3/4 of SN4 ready to go.

[Anonymous No.11537428]

>>11534109
>microfission NTRs

netorares?

[Anonymous No.11537433]

>>11537428
in this context NTR means
Nuclear
Thermal
Rocket

[Anonymous No.11537460]

How the fuck do you get nitrogen on Mars?

I've been looking into ISRU, and there are fairly easy ways to get oxygen, water and even things like steel and plastic using only Martian materials.

The big bottleneck seems to be nitrogen. Humans can't live in 100% oxygen atmospheres and there doesn't seem to be any good way to source large amounts of nitrogen on Mars.

[Anonymous No.11537472]

>>11537460
there's nitrogen in the atmosphere

[Anonymous No.11537482]

>>11537460
>Humans can't live in 100% oxygen atmospheres

Wrong. Humans are 100% able to live in a 100% oxygen atmosphere as long as it’s at a lower pressure than Earth’s atmosphere, so that we inhale the same amount of oxygen we inhale here. The Apollo missions used 100% oxygen atmospheres this way.

[Anonymous No.11537494]

>>11537460
Mars has nitrogen in atmosphere and in soil. ~3-6% of mars soil/atmosphere is nitrogen.

[Anonymous No.11537497]

>>11537494
You don’t need nitrogen except for use in plant fertilizer

[Anonymous No.11537505]

>>11537497
it's useful as a fire retardant

[Anonymous No.11537531]

>>11537505
True. Probably has some chemistry applications that I am unaware of too

[Anonymous No.11537545]

>>11537482
Apollo 1, look into it

[Anonymous No.11537555]

>>11537545
Pure oxygen atmospheres were used on future Apollo missions without issue. When the fire occurred, the pressure of the capsule was even higher than standard atmospheric pressure, greatly aiding combustion. An oxygen atmosphere at 5 psi is no more combustible than standard atmospheric conditions.

[Anonymous No.11537563]

>>11537555
it is absolutely more combustible than standard atmospheric conditions, because it's heating up less (inert) nitrogen
also the nitrogen just plain gets in the way sometimes but that effect doesn't dominate until very very low concentrations of your reactives

[Anonymous No.11537564]

>>11537563
>it is absolutely more combustible than standard atmospheric conditions, because it's heating up less (inert) nitrogen

Oxygen doesn’t catch on fire

[Anonymous No.11537577]

>>11537564
it participates in combustion

[Anonymous No.11537612]

>>11536621
China is gonna find itself back in the fucking rice fields as soon as various countries start up their various production again.
You didn't think they were going to keep buying shit from someone who just released a plague on the world, lied about it, stripped them dry of PPE, then turned around and sold them faulty PPE at 5x the market price?
China is done. They overplayed their hand.

[Anonymous No.11537864]

I don't even shill anything but the amount of cope from mutts ITT is amusing.
Do you have any reason to massively overdo your compulsory two minutes hate today? I don't remember reading any substantial news from them this week.

[Anonymous No.11537881]

>>11537612
common people =! megacorp jews
using chinese slaves is still more profitable than any PR hit from keeping manufacturing there

[Anonymous No.11537885]

>>11537881
>profitable
Yeah, too bad that people aren't going to let them anymore. Shit has been nationalized in the past. It will again.

[Anonymous No.11537888]

Pic from inside header fuel tank for SN4.

[Anonymous No.11537910]

>>11531425
>I just hope SN3 didn't fail because of stupidity. Like if they didn't realize a full tank on top of a sub atmospheric pressure tank would be a problem.
welp

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1246677676733104130

[Anonymous No.11537975]

>>11536409
M O O N
S A C

[Anonymous No.11538163]

JUST A FLU
VIRUS IS FAKE NEWS
JOOS MADE IT UP
TOTALLY NOT END OF THE WORLD
TAKE YOUR MEDS NIGGER

[Anonymous No.11538169]

>>11537555
>An oxygen atmosphere at 5 psi is no more combustible than standard atmospheric conditions.

Nope, it is still more combustible due to no buffer gas. Partial pressure alone does not tell you the whole store.

[Anonymous No.11538181]

>>11536212
>/sci/ is one person
You are part of /sci/ which means you are the one who denied it.

[Anonymous No.11538183]

>>11536409
Imagine what happens if one of them gets ill or injured and can't walk.

[Anonymous No.11538246]

new

>>11538238

[Anonymous No.11538268]

>>11537089
only if the mirror is already at the destination

[Anonymous No.11538319]

>>11538163
Go away schizo

[Anonymous No.11538507]

>>11537028
yes

[Anonymous No.11538519]

>>11537555
>An oxygen atmosphere at 5 psi is no more combustible than standard atmospheric conditions.
WRONG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlSeHSDc-Do

[Anonymous No.11538524]

>>11537888
neat