/sfg/ Spaceflight General

[Anonymous No.11611528]

SpaceX and Chill.

Starship SN4 passed cryo testing.

previous thread:
>>11607651

[Anonymous No.11611540]

First for regolith swarm robotic constructed hive cities

[Anonymous No.11611543]

This is now a Mega-Earths thread
Densitylets need not apply.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega-Earth

[Anonymous No.11611560]

>>11611543
Good luck getting off your world there, shortstack. you'll need it
Meanwhile superior Martians will dominate the "Terran" Empire

[Anonymous No.11611561]

>>11611528
Third for LEO assembly

[Anonymous No.11611567]

>>11611560
Who says anyone's gonna live there? The whole point is that they manage to be even less habitable than a big Jupiter-mass gas giant.

[Anonymous No.11611570]

>>11611561
I just realized the Orbital Yeet Train there could actually push a decent sized Plasma Magnetic Sail probe out past the moon. If it works as advertised the sail could then take it anywhere from Mars to Neptune.

[Anonymous No.11611572]

>>11611570
That's crazy but I don't remember asking

[Anonymous No.11611575]

>>11611570
But anon, why not just make the Yeet Train longer?

[Anonymous No.11611576]

>>11611575
Solar wind is 400,000m/s delta V if you can sail with it. The train is just to get far enough out from Earth that the magnetosphere doesn't block it.

[Anonymous No.11611590]

>>11611560
Martians will be the ultimate manlets to be mocked on 4channel circa 2047

[Anonymous No.11611595]

>>11611575
Diminishing returns

[Anonymous No.11611597]

>>11611575
Just make the yeet train long enough that people and goods can be transported along it to the destination.

[Anonymous No.11611621]

>>11611528
>spaceflight
lol no
rockets don't work in space

[Anonymous No.11611623]

>Another Starlink launch on May 7
Astrofags on suicide watch

[Anonymous No.11611643]

>>11611623
Shade will be there starting with the coming launch.

[Anonymous No.11611649]

>>11611643
there will be ONE satellite with the sunshade

[Anonymous No.11611673]

>>11611597
>launch an orbital ring 50t at a time
>fill it with hypergolic rocket fuel and lox
If that doesn't spell aloha snackbar magnet I don't know what does.

[Anonymous No.11611701]

>>11611623
I’ve been SpaceX defense force on a local astronomy group latelt. Its funny as all the boomers shriek about how Elon is evil and ruining the nightsky for future generations and trapping us all in a kessler syndrome nightmare while the group has exploded in popularity in the last few weeks and every new post is young people and parents asking for Starlink times.

Fuck your photographs. The future is back off the shelf.

[Anonymous No.11611704]

Do the satellites we put up around Earth purposefully have orbits that decay until the sat comes back or is there some variable that I'm forgetting in the whole angular velocity equation.

If a satellite is beyond the atmosphere there shouldn't be anything providing drag right? Wouldn't it orbit forever?

[Anonymous No.11611711]

>>11611701
>The future is back off the shelf.
All I ask is more men on the moon than my boomer dad experienced in his youth.

>>11611704
LEO still has atmospheric drag. It's why the ISS needs to boost periodically.

[Anonymous No.11611713]

>>11611704
Starlink (in low earth orbit) is still inside the notional atmosphere (the thermosphere/mesophere) although it's mostly just individual atoms bouncing up off of regular atmosphere and as such they will decay within the decade if they all die
satellites above that will be in orbit essentially forever
I think some strange things happen in geostationary with the moon

[Anonymous No.11611735]

>>11611701
Realistically speaking, what can astronomyfags do to hinder the construction of Starlink?

[Anonymous No.11611738]

>>11611735
absolutely fucking nothing

[Anonymous No.11611749]

>>11611735
Pretty much nothing. Musk is concerned by bad PR and Space positivity as stupid ideas taking hold mainstream could lead to retarded laws that hamstring private space ventures as much as Nasa got gutted and hamstringed but one booster landing video drowns out a thousand butthurt astrophotographers.

[Anonymous No.11611753]

>>11611623
>>11611701
>openly lauding and campaigning for the destruction of the night sky

only spacex redditors do this

[Anonymous No.11611757]

>>11611753
>The destruction of the natural night sky in the early evening and morning on certain days in certain conditions*

[Anonymous No.11611760]

>>11611753
>Caring more about “the night sky” than human wellbeing and actually going to the “night sky” instead of staring at it like a monkey

Gross.

[Anonymous No.11611761]

>>11611757
>for about two years or less depending on the results of the darkening tests

[Anonymous No.11611762]

I get megaconstellation hate for sure but hating a megaconstellation that pays for the tech to eventually clean itself up is pretty retarded.

[Anonymous No.11611763]

>>11611757
How you've characterised it is that the night sky will be completely ruined and that there is nothing wrong with that, you're not being edgy, you're just being callous, not everyone shares your enthusiasm retard.

>>11611760
*laughs in kessler syndrome

[Anonymous No.11611766]

>>11611762
it wont, prove otherwise

[Anonymous No.11611767]

>>11611763
humanity has still only launched a couple of orders of magnitude too little mass to orbit to initiate kessler, anon

[Anonymous No.11611769]

>>11611763
>laughs in kessler syndrome

Not a real thing. All Starlink satellites are at an altitude that would deorbit within a few years.

>Muh night sky

No one cares that you like to guffaw at distant plasma balls

[Anonymous No.11611771]

>>11611766
>it wont

Burden of proof is yours.
Can’t meet it. So sad.

[Anonymous No.11611776]

>>11611771
nobody's claims are substantiated right now

[Anonymous No.11611777]

>>11611776
>nobody's claims are substantiated right now

I didn’t make any other than that Starlink satellites are at an orbit where they will reenter within a few years, which is really easy to confirm using google.

[Anonymous No.11611778]

>>11611757
Most deep sky objects require an entire night of exposure to get a good enough image for analysis, no, it won't obliterate ground based astronomy, it will just severely hinder it to the extent it will hold back astronomy for years to come, and I don't give a fuck if your redditor shit brain thinks astronomy is stupid, the field of Astronomy has great benefit, but there is even more significant benefit to space exploration you fucking retard, you're literally shooting yourself in the foot then just shrugging it off by saying "huuuur technology will solve it LOL"

[Anonymous No.11611780]

>>11611777
ah yeah you're right, that's a good one

[Anonymous No.11611783]

>>11611778
https://youtu.be/PxlbNbrnRfw

[Anonymous No.11611785]

>>11611778
Ground astronomy in an age of orbital infrastructure is like ground astronomy next to a major highway. Build space telescopes.

[Anonymous No.11611787]

>>11611778
>the field of Astronomy has great benefit

Explain specifically what benefit astronomy has to humanity other than providing us with currently useless knowledge about exoplanets. Why not just lob a telescope into orbit?

[Anonymous No.11611789]

>>11611787
No launch vehicles are currently operational that can replicate or replace the light collection area (and thus, resolution) of big ground based telescopes. Once this is solved, the next trick is figuring out how to control the costs of space telescopes so they stop costing $200 million per square meter of mirror.

[Anonymous No.11611791]

>>11611787
he's not wrong, astronomy has great benefit
can't remember what, exactly, but it's cool stuff

[Anonymous No.11611793]

>>11611789
>No launch vehicles are currently operational that can replicate or replace the light collection area (and thus, resolution) of big ground based telescopes

Wait until Starship is operational. There is no great urgency here.

[Anonymous No.11611797]

>>11611789
>Once this is solved, the next trick is figuring out how to control the costs of space telescopes so they stop costing $200 million per square meter of mirror.
Part of the reason they're so expensive is because they need to be made out of farts and butterfly wings to meet mass budget for decent orbits on most rockets currently flying. Starship lets you build them out of steel like ground telescopes and reduces the origami needed to fit in the payload bay.

[Anonymous No.11611799]

>>11611797
That's half the problem, and not necessarily the most expensive part. The hard part is the ultra-high precision metrology, heat management, and telescope pointing you need to avoid having a fuzzy image.

[Anonymous No.11611807]

>>11611799
>metrology
lasers
>heat management
substitute active laser metrology
>telescope pointing
get gud

[Anonymous No.11611809]

>>11611785
>build space telescopes
oh, and how long do you think that will fucking take? currently there are FOUR space telescopes online right now, the only one that is optical is 30 years old and nearing the end of it's operational life, JWST took eons to build, future space telescopes will likely be worse, and this may surprise you, but the brunt of astronomy work is done by ground based observation, because what do you fucking know? launching orbital space telescopes is much more expensive and time consuming than building a ground based one, for this reason for one optical space based telescope we have vastly more ground based telescopes, "Build space telescopes" just shows me how dunning-Kruger you are in this topic and it explains why you and other people just casually go "LOL WHO CARES ABOUT ASTRONOMY LOL!!" ITT


>>11611789
That won't happen for the next 40 years if JWST is anything to go by, the musk fanboys here are retard level idealists that think within 10 years we will magically have dozens of space telescopes operational to make up for the clusterfuck mega-constellations have caused, mark my words, when starlink and other mega-constellations finally fucks up ground based astronomy we will be waiting decades until space based observatories make up the shortfall

[Anonymous No.11611812]

>>11611807
You can't laser your way out of differential thermal expansion of your telescope pointing mounts, and you can't use ordinary contact bearings or mechanisms because they'll cold-weld themselves in space.

[Anonymous No.11611813]

>>11611809
>oh, and how long do you think that will fucking take?

Shouldn’t take too long at all if a private institution constructs it. Sorry but astronomy simply isn’t as important as landing on Mars lol

Touch, don’t look. Go touch it.

[Anonymous No.11611817]

>>11611809
>oh, and how long do you think that will fucking take?
Probably ten years after Starship gets operational. Yes, astronomy is mainly done on the ground now, but given the precision limits imposed by atmospheric distortion the results are about as precise as they're ever going to be, which still sucks a fat one compared to Hubble for most optical wavelength stuff. Building in space was always going to be necessary to advance. Now it's just a bit more urgent. Radio telescopes won't be impacted by starlink much

[Anonymous No.11611819]

>>11611809
stfu oldspace nigger

[Anonymous No.11611826]

>>11611813
>Shouldn’t take too long at all if a private institution constructs it.

Name one private institution that has the money and incentive to build a ten billion dollar space telescope. Do it now.

>Sorry but astronomy simply isn’t as important as landing on Mars lol

Astronomy discovered the Red dirt ball you're trying to land on in the first place. It's just astonishing when you cretins just pooh-pooh the role of Astronomy in space exploration.

>>11611817
>Probably ten years after Starship gets operational.
That's very idealistic.

[Anonymous No.11611833]

>>11611826
name a private institution that would waste ten billion dollars on oldspace pork instead of slapping the scientists and building a cheaper telescope

[Anonymous No.11611841]

>>11611826
>Name one private institution that has the money and incentive to build a ten billion dollar space telescope.

Ten billion dollars?
I said private, not NASA.
Universities have collaborated to construct ground-based telescopes many times before, so they could do the same for a space telescope.

> Astronomy discovered the Red dirt ball you're trying to land on in the first place.

A really long time ago. Then is not now. Now is the time to touch instead of ogle.

[Anonymous No.11611854]

>>11611833
I can't, because it would still be too expensive for a private institution to justify raising the capital for, even if JWST only ballooned to 5 billion it would still be too expensive for any private venture to foot.

>>11611841
Yeah universities absolutely have a couple of billion lying around to splurge on a space telescope with minimal financial return and that could blow up on the launch pad or fail to deploy. Good one.

>>11611841
>A really long time ago. Then is not now. Now is the time to touch instead of ogle.
>casually ignores the fact that if it wasn't for astronomy he wouldn't even know Mars existed

JFC are all muskfags like this?

[Anonymous No.11611861]

>>11611854
nigger
I disagree with your $5 billion estimate

[Anonymous No.11611867]

>>11611854
>Casually ignore the fact that historical astronomers discovering Mars has literally no relevance to whether or not modern astronomy is more important than going to Mars in the modern world

Are all oldspace shills like this?

[Anonymous No.11611872]

>>11611854
>Yeah universities absolutely have a couple of billion lying around to splurge on a space telescope with minimal financial return and that could blow up on the launch pad or fail to deploy. Good one.

Oh well. Not my problem.

[Anonymous No.11611873]

>>11611826
Starlink isn't going to gas earth based astronomy, but I wish it was after seeing all you faggots crawl out of the woodwork.

[Anonymous No.11611874]

When was the last time you looked up at the sky and actually saw the stars?

[Anonymous No.11611883]

>>11611874
One minute ago, and I live in a relatively urban area. Whatever brief amusement the stars have is dwarfed by the wonder of seeing human constructs glittering above, and nonexistent in comparison to my interest in mankind landing on other worlds. You’re not a baby anymore, anon. It’s time to stop window shopping and buy.

[Anonymous No.11611893]

>>11611874
Ruralfag here, every night. Not even remotely concerned about starlink because it's obvious bullshit designed to write hit pieces around.

[Anonymous No.11611922]

>>11611883
Satellites are cool and all, but the cosmos are cooler.

[Anonymous No.11611953]

>>11611922
Sure, so let’s go there and stop staring at them like a deer caught in headlights.

[Anonymous No.11611975]

I love space x but these threads have attracted a lot of retards who actively cheer for the possible disruption of a major field in science.

[Anonymous No.11611978]

>>11611701
I haven't been able to actually see any starlink sats despite looking for them with binoculars as they pass over head. Do I need less light to see them, or better optics?

[Anonymous No.11611988]

>>11611975
Name one tangible benefit of modern astronomy.

[Anonymous No.11611992]

>>11611749
And then there's the absolute bullshit like that fake as fuck youtube video showing two starlink trains crossing and faint laser lines between them. There are so many things fake and gay about that.

[Anonymous No.11612005]

Upcoming launches
>7 May - Falcon 9 - Starlink 7
>16 May - Atlas V - X-37b
>20 May - H-IIB - HTV resupply to ISS
>27 May - Falcon 9 - Dragon 2 crew to ISS

* ? May - Starship SN4 - 150m hop

[Anonymous No.11612040]

>>11611978
No should be visible with the naked eye. Clear as Venus a few times last week for me but i’m in a northern latitude.

Make sure you’re using info for your area specifically. An app called Sky Guide is best for me.

[Anonymous No.11612064]

>>11611560
>>11611516
what would be the practical maximum gravity for a planet to be able to fly off again with rockets?
i know there is probably no sharp border where it suddenly becomes completely impossible but i assume at around 2 g you would probably hit a wall of what is feasible.

[Anonymous No.11612082]

>>11611778
Since orbits of said satellites are known with precision and I suppose long exposures today are the result of processing long sequences of images with computers, isn't this solvable just by upgrading software?

[Anonymous No.11612083]

>>11611854
>JFC are all muskfags like this?
on behalf of most muskfags. this guy is a retard.
astronomy is an important and interesting field of study and it is a shame starlink could make it harder.

[Anonymous No.11612087]

>>11612083
>astronomy is an important and interesting field of study and it is a shame starlink could make it harder.

Name one tangible benefit of modern astronomy.

[Anonymous No.11612090]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDJ4l6Mc-IM

[Anonymous No.11612094]

>>11611528
I gaining weight bros.
Literally nothing fits me anymore :\

[Anonymous No.11612098]

I am worried about professional astronomy but i only here worthless amateurs giving off. Sounds like the ESA ‘collision course’ all over again.

[Anonymous No.11612099]

>>11612087
discovering new exoplanets, learning more about the universe ect.
if you don't like that personally kindly fuck off from sfg

[Anonymous No.11612101]

>>11611874
If we are willing to bulldoze beautiful and lifegiving forests so Billy can continue being addicted to corn syrup, then we are sure going to put up thousabds of satellites so poorfags can access the webs, even if you might see less twinky stars.

[Anonymous No.11612111]

>>11612090
>24 million pounds of thrust in a single engine bell
>8 millions pounds of thrust in control engines
Somebody did too much amphetamines for breakfast, lunch and dinner when designing that thing.

http://aerospaceprojectsreview.com/ev3n1.htm

[Anonymous No.11612112]

>>11612099
>discovering new exoplanets

Not going to happen from earth's surface

>learning more about the universe

Not a tangible benefit, just scientists having a circle jerk.

[Anonymous No.11612119]

>>11612099
Ground scopes are seeing exoplanets?

[Anonymous No.11612121]

>>11612119
No, they're not. Poor old venerable Hubble is doing all that shit until JWST gets off the ground.

[Anonymous No.11612128]

Fuck off astronomy fags, I want to know about exoplanets so bad and none of you cunts fucking deliver jack shit. Start putting together commercial companies to build big, cheap, space based satellites or fuck off. No one cares that muh radio astronomy is going to be slightly more difficult, absolutely get fucked, this shit is funding Mars and is infinitely more important than your stupid pictures.

[Anonymous No.11612134]

>>11611590
they'll probably be 2m tall chads

[Anonymous No.11612137]

>>11612112
>Not going to happen from earth's surface
wrong
>Not a tangible benefit, just scientists having a circle jerk.
and what is spaceflight as a whole then? or are you one of those fags who think we will get rich through asteroid meming in a few years?

[Anonymous No.11612141]

>>11611753
and what are you gonna do about it?

[Anonymous No.11612145]

>>11612121
at this point, never, might as well just start working on the next one

[Anonymous No.11612152]

>>11612137
Literally countless innovations have come out of spaceflight and continue to do so, meanwhile astronomy peaked out on useful shit decades ago.

>earth based exoplanet imager
Go on then who is building it

[Anonymous No.11612155]

>>11612141
I will never tire of this pic. This is how you start a rocket company.

[Anonymous No.11612160]

>>11612155
I have 4 guitars and I'm planning on buying a TIG apparatus. Should I start my own rocket company?

[Anonymous No.11612174]

>>11612099
>discovering new exoplanets, learning more about the universe ect

That’s cool and all but less important than actually going to other planets. Ogle the stars from Mars or Luna.

[Anonymous No.11612175]

>>11611760
>you don't understand mom, I need my twitch videos to load faster! It's all about my wellbeing!

[Anonymous No.11612178]

>the astronomy boogeyman again
you're getting your own special cuckshades so what do you have to complain about, fuck off

>>11612160
yes absolutely

[Anonymous No.11612179]

>>11612175
>Look mom I made things up about other people on an anonymous Korean rhinoplasty forum

Starlink is going up and there’s nothing you can do about it. Lol

[Anonymous No.11612182]

>>11611975
Just put your 'scopes in space bro
You know you want to.

[Anonymous No.11612184]

>>11612175
>NOO NOT THE STARERINOS!
>haha starship go zoom

[Anonymous No.11612189]

Imagine being so low-t that you care more about some lights in the sky with no practical significance than actually going to other planets and spreading glorious human civilization

[Anonymous No.11612192]

>>11612178
Once shit calms down a bit, I'll begin my manned Stardineship program.

[Anonymous No.11612210]

>>11611778
>Most deep sky objects require an entire night of exposure to get a good enough image for analysis

You don't even know what you are talking about. Deep sky objects are observed with low field of views, where satellites do not interfere as chances of it passing in front of the scope are miniscule. Starlink is a potential issue for high field of view astronomical surveys only. These are growing in importance but still only a tiny part of astronomy in general.

[Anonymous No.11612214]

>>11611826
>Name one private institution that has the money and incentive to build a ten billion dollar space telescope. Do it now.

Who says private institution will pay for it? Public private partnership will be used. Just like with Falcon rockets.

[Anonymous No.11612215]

>>11612210
Why are they growing in importance?

[Anonymous No.11612216]

I wish Elon would leave them up bright and shiny so the whole world could see that we've entered into a new era, but i doubt we'll be so lucky. It would no doubt define the generation, and inspiring children and creativity in the arts. Instead most people probably wont know. Thanks, starfuckers. I bet these same people are going to flip their shit when the Japanese finally use their artificial meteor shower satellites.

[Anonymous No.11612219]

>>11611883
>Whatever brief amusement the stars have is dwarfed by the wonder of seeing human constructs glittering above

Quoted for truth.

[Anonymous No.11612221]

Surely JWST is a bad example as its SLS tier scandal anyway but on the subject of multi billion how much profit do you see Starlink reaping for SpaceX. The current 10b projected for the first year.

[Anonymous No.11612228]

>>11612215
large scale census-like observations of big parts of the sky at once

[Anonymous No.11612250]

We're in a second space age right? The first started with Sputnik and ranged from the 1950s-1980s, with the second one starting around 2000 (1998: ISS, 2002: SpaceX, 2003: Columbia disaster, Chinese manned spaceflight)?

[Anonymous No.11612268]

>>11612250
First space age: 1957 (Sputnik) - 1972 (last Apollo flight)

43 years of Great Spaceflight Winter

Second space age: 2015 (first vertical landing of an orbital-class booster during Orbcomm Falcon 9 launch) - ongoing

[Anonymous No.11612271]

>>11612155
Especially so if your rockets are made by mexican welders.

[Anonymous No.11612272]

>>11612250

>>11612268 This is almost exactly what I was about to say except I probably would have started with the grasshopper.

[Anonymous No.11612301]

>>11612268
>1957 - 1972 was 15 years
>second space age ends in 2030, lasting 15 years too
>humans make several visits to mars
>spacex collapses
>enter into a second great spaceflight winter

[Anonymous No.11612303]

>>11612301
pls no

[Anonymous No.11612308]

>>11612303
>spacex makes a few successful landings on mars
>colony starts to grow
>elon goes
>mission suffers catastrophic failure
>elon dies
>government steps in
>decides to end the program because it's too dangerous
>spacex dies
>AT&TComcast buys starlink, shuts it down

[Anonymous No.11612316]

>>11612301
>SpaceX dissolves in 2030 because it accomplished its mission
>reforms as the Crossbone Vanguard
>the third space age begins to conquer jupiter

[Anonymous No.11612318]

>>11612308
>colonist rebellion
>they start building martian starships from scratch, supported by earth-based sympathisers
>invasion of the moon
>third age of spaceflight begins, first interplanetary conflict

[Anonymous No.11612323]

>>11612301
The first era of space exploration ended because government interest dried up. Once the private sector gets its teeth sunk in, its not going anywhere.

[Anonymous No.11612325]

>>11612308
>boing buys spacex
>says reusable spaceflight isnt profitable
>shuts down starship, creates falcon 10 based on falcon 9
>falcon 10 isnt reusable and costs $500 million to launch
>patents reusable spaceflight, sues others who attempt it into oblivion

[Anonymous No.11612339]

>>11612325
pretty sure this would create something like the Elon equivalent of the brotherhood of nod, or some kind of loyalist space-ISIS, with subsequent outcomes on BOING! facilities

[Anonymous No.11612353]

>>11612339
ISS-IS

[Anonymous No.11612355]

>>11612318 only sane answer to >>11612308 worst timeline.

[Anonymous No.11612398]

I had a luxury of trying Hughesnet. Here's the stats I got. ~600 ms minimum ~1400 ms maximum latency. Some services do not work properly because high latency spikes. Barely usable during daytime, I'm not talking about paltry 20GB bandwidth for $80/m, but shits superslow. Starlink can't get here soon enough.

[Anonymous No.11612399]

>>11612087
asteroid detection

[Anonymous No.11612405]

>>11612119
the big ones that are going up will

Well except TMT because the the hawaiian authorities are cowards

[Anonymous No.11612408]

>>11611874
Yesterday

[Anonymous No.11612409]

search "site:admin.spacex.com filetype:pdf" in google/duckduckgo and see what happens

[Anonymous No.11612414]

>>11612409
Are trying to trick me into doing something illegal? I'm sure an am*rican court could convict something of hacking for that.

[Anonymous No.11612416]

>>11611787
This,whats the point in taking pictures and doing that long exposure shit when you cant even see it with the naked eye

[Anonymous No.11612422]

>>11612399
i hope you were just looking for something to 'gotcha' anon with but in context that's a retarded example
it has nothing to do with starlink because it's mostly (entirely?) done in orbit
it has no tangible benefits unless you can actually do something about what you find, so you need spacex to succeed anyway

[Anonymous No.11612424]

>>11612416
long exposure astrophotography is absolutely creatively bankrupt

[Anonymous No.11612436]

>>11611528
>Starship SN4 passed cryo testing.
Neat seeing R&D live.

[Anonymous No.11612443]

>>11612416
pretty pictures with trippy filters to submit to magazine competitions

[Anonymous No.11612463]

Musk at Astro2020 (stolen from plebbit)

"Musk also says that SpaceX is implementing an “orientation roll” on those satellites whose orbits are being raised to reduce reflections off solar panels."

"Musk estimates the existing Starlink satellites, including those without any brightness mitigations, will be deorbited in 3-4 years, in part because they’ll be rendered obsolete by v2 satellites with “far greater throughput.”"

"Musk says darkening the satellites is “quite simple, actually” and that “we’ll feel a bit silly in hindsight.”"

The goal of SpaceX is to make Starlink satellites "invisible to the naked eye within a week of launch". Also notes that the brightness of the objects is directly related to their configuration/orientation on orbit, which they continue to work on.

"What the public sees is mostly the #Starlink objects during orbit raise. Once the objects reach station, the source of brightness is the reflection from antennas. We tried blacking out the antennas on Darksat and it worked, but sun shades will work better."

"The benefit of hindsight suggests that satellite visibility mitigation efforts are quite simple; reduce albedo of surfaces or shade them. "It's not that hard."

[Anonymous No.11612467]

>>11612268
Why isn't Skylab worthy? It's been the most kino thing in space ever so far aside from walking on the moon.

[Anonymous No.11612468]

>>11612422
>it has no tangible benefits unless you can actually do something about what you find

like that time I found a tangible benefit of modern astronomy and anon didn't like it

[Anonymous No.11612470]

If it has an atmosphere, 2g is pretty much the limit. If it doesn't have one, then 3g might be possible, 4g if you were able to start accelerating in a horizontal surface rather than have to fly vertically.

as for math, consider that for 2g you need around the square root of 2 the orbit velocity compared to 1 g. Round that up to 1,5 and by the tsiolkovsky rocket equation you need double the mass ratio and double the thrust, two at least twice the number of stages and double the number of engines per stage, each with their own weight to carry...

[Anonymous No.11612474]

>>11612467

[Anonymous No.11612475]

>>11612470
meant for >>11612064

[Anonymous No.11612476]

>>11612470
I think the problem is more materials than it is thrust or mass ratio

[Anonymous No.11612478]

>>11612468
passive aggression is not an argument, what are you trying to communicate

[Anonymous No.11612481]

What would it take for Congress to give NASA a bigger budget?

[Anonymous No.11612482]

>>11612268
I would say the second space age started in 2010 when SpaceX launched the first successful mission, starting the whole newspace v oldspace we are in now

[Anonymous No.11612484]

>>11612481
>flat budget basically since the tail end of the apollo program onwards
aliens
not even mars microbes, explicitly greys with jump drives

[Anonymous No.11612495]

>>11612481
Pic with a china flag on the side in LEO?

[Anonymous No.11612502]

>>11612476
even the shuttle could witstand a thrust to weight ratio of 3, so 2 g doesn't seem impossible.

[Anonymous No.11612506]

>>11612301
>>second space age ends
Not if it leads to frozen mushy bat soup raining down on the US of A eventually. Not to mention designated shitting orbits. The second space age is here to stay.

[Anonymous No.11612512]

>>11612481
Its probably peaked with Trump. They’ll be as keen to privatise as much as possible as everyone else.

[Anonymous No.11612519]

>>11612481
Produce results either with their man lander or through commercial partners via SpaceX.

[Anonymous No.11612536]

>>11612484
>>11612495
you're probably right

>>11612519
i hope

[Anonymous No.11612549]

I'll ask here since there is no astronomy thread. Is it possible for a terrestrial planet to acquire many long-term irregular moons? What characteristics would it have? Would it have to be an outer planet, or could it be an inner planet? Thank you.

gif semi-related

[Anonymous No.11612553]

>>11612549
It should be theoretically possible I think. It's not quite so likely if you have large gas giants acting like vacuum cleaners like we have.

[Anonymous No.11612565]

>>11612549
outer planets would have an easier time than inner planets, because their own gravity is thus more influential than the sun. For a planet like mercury it would be impossible.

[Anonymous No.11612594]

We need to figure out how to pack/build an Integral Fast Reactor onto Mars so a colony/city could have a reliable heat and power system for when duststorms hit
It’s less expensive than a MSR and it’s more fuel efficient than a LWR plus it can breed more fuel

[Anonymous No.11612602]

>>11612467
because he is a cuck
skylab is peak aerospace

[Anonymous No.11612668]

>>11612594
Nasa already has a pretty safe nuclear driven stirling generator that will most likely be used for future missions.

https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/kilopower

[Anonymous No.11612691]

>>11612467
Skylab is worthy for sure. Too bad it was only occupied for a short time. Anyway:

First Space Age: 1957 (Sputnik) - 1974 (Skylab last crew departure)

[Anonymous No.11612694]

>>11612668
Cost $1 billion per generator. At that price, Musk can field 1000x more power generated through Solar Panels created on Earth and delivered to Mars for less.

[Anonymous No.11612698]

>>11612694
>Cost $1 billion per generator.
link?

[Anonymous No.11612701]

>>11612495

Once the CCP puts a team on the Moon, the space age will be set in stone without question

[Anonymous No.11612707]

>>11612701
If Americans aren't already on both the Moon and Mars by the time that happens, something terrible went wrong.

[Anonymous No.11612724]

>>11612565
Is there a way to quantify that? Such as, if a planet has a Hill sphere of X radius, and is Y away from the belt, then it'll be expected to have N irregular moons?

[Anonymous No.11612732]

>>11612724
Astronomers barely understand the solar system as we know it, how would they be able to know that for all kinds of solar systems that are out there?

[Anonymous No.11612734]

>>11612668
I have to imagine that radioisotope generators will be inadequate for the fuckton of energy that future Mars missions will require.

I'm picturing breeder reactors made mostly with ISRU'd Martian resources.

[Anonymous No.11612736]

>>11612732
they can simulate the gravity of large bodies pretty well, though
it's as close to experimentation as astronomers can get

[Anonymous No.11612743]

>>11612694
>Cost $1 billion per generator
[citation needed]

[Anonymous No.11612744]

>>11612734
It's start anon, it's for the first missions where they are taking rock samples and doing press pictures.
The nuclear reactor comes later.

[Anonymous No.11612747]

>>11612736
the three body problem doesn't have a analytical solution, let alone systems with multiple bodies and external factors like solar winds...

The only thing you could use to quantify this idea is calculate the volume of the gravity well where a planet's influence is largest, which is doable.

[Anonymous No.11612752]

>>11612707
27 may: falcon 9 has a mysterious malfunction, crew is lost.
Starship project on halt, Spacex goes bankrupt.
China buy all the tech, Elon Musk get chinese citizenship and changes is name to Chon Ma.
Starship goes back into development, this time using even cheaper chinese welders.
A few deaths while developing it, all censored.
The era of chinese Mars begins, Boeing still working on SLS.

[Anonymous No.11612757]

>>11612752
Stop that, some Bond villain in Beijing is probably reading this thread and stroking their non-existent, no-longer-there-because-somebody-ate-it, white Persian cat.

[Anonymous No.11612766]

>>11612747
it doesn't need to be perfect to determine some parameters for how likely capturing incoming bodies is relative to size and distance from the sun. At least a lower and upper bound.

[Anonymous No.11612776]

>>11611854
How about instead of bitching you innovate. No wonder oldspace sucks.

[Anonymous No.11612801]

>>11612766
Until we saw a bunch of hot jupiters we didn't even realize gas giants could migrate. Running simulations within a chaotic environment is fucky business.

[Anonymous No.11612809]

https://twitter.com/JohnBarentine/status/1254818221145784333?s=19

[Anonymous No.11612810]

>>11611854
Ivy's plus MIT, Stanford, Duke, Rice and the Liberal arts colleges could easily pool the money for it. I know swarthmore has a hard on for astronomy at least.

[Anonymous No.11612814]

>>11612809
Bet their next complaint will be Kessler syndrome or whatever.

[Anonymous No.11612817]

>>11612776
You are so innocent and naive, your simplistic perspective of reality is adorable.

[Anonymous No.11612818]

>>11612814
There are already complaints about it. Some are even speculating that SpaceX would trap mankind to Earth forever.

[Anonymous No.11612819]

>>11611778
> Astronomers discover new methods that leverage Starlink to actually IMPROVE earth-based observation

[Anonymous No.11612828]

>>11612817
imagine being this proud of your own ineptitude
this dude is literally wallowing in his own feces, complaining that it smells bad and screaming at everyone who tells him to stop that they need to abandon their naive fantasies that he could survive in any way but slathering himself in shit

[Anonymous No.11612832]

>>11612809
It should be interesting to see what this looks like from the ground.

[Anonymous No.11612836]

>>11612817
$1b per launch goes wheeeee

[Anonymous No.11612837]

>>11612818
Part of me wishes that he does.
God fucking help me I'm so tired of people.

[Anonymous No.11612853]

blocking light is the same as reflecting light in the sense of harming astronomy. So why care about reflective Starlink sats again?

[Anonymous No.11612855]

>>11612853
Because they can be easily seen by the public and thus easily causes outrage.

[Anonymous No.11612858]

>>11612814
>Bet their next complaint will be Kessler syndrome
Right on time.

[Anonymous No.11612859]

>>11612734

[Anonymous No.11612863]

>>11612858
Yeah, this isn't my first rodeo.
I'll go in front of the mirror now and practice hating people to death, if that doesn't work, I'll practice turning myself into pure energy and leave this fucking shithole.

[Anonymous No.11612865]

>>11612859
Explain pls

[Anonymous No.11612870]

>>11612865
it's just a size comparison of two alternate power sources with similar output

[Anonymous No.11612887]

>>11612853
Not at all. Blocking 1 out of 10 photons from a certain direction from reaching the telescope sensor is a lot different from adding a bunch of extraneous photons all over the place.

[Anonymous No.11612889]

>>11612865
>>11612870
I'm assuming that the areas being compared are the required radiator area to dissipate waste heat?

[Anonymous No.11612891]

What's the mass of 60 starlink satellites?

[Anonymous No.11612896]

>>11612891
227-260kg a piece depending on version + the scaffolding.

[Anonymous No.11612898]

>>11612668
>Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling Technology (KRUSTY)

fucking based

[Anonymous No.11612903]

>>11612858
>both "problems" solved before the complaint was ever made
You can never satisfy fucking smoothies.

[Anonymous No.11612910]

>>11612889
yeah

[Anonymous No.11612912]

>>11612898
no escaping this ride, klown

[Anonymous No.11612914]

>>11612912
delicious raspberry popsicles

[Anonymous No.11612945]

Bonfire lit

[Anonymous No.11612949]

>>11612945
They filling it up with taco truck leftovers?

[Anonymous No.11612951]

>>11612914
kek, forbidden ice lollies

[Anonymous No.11612960]

>>11612945
Purpose? Static fire test already?

[Anonymous No.11612964]

>>11612945
here we go, I believe this is the first time they lit it since starhopper tests over half a year ago

[Anonymous No.11612968]

>>11612960
Some time soon hopefully. Flare is burning the methane boiloff from the tank farm.

[Anonymous No.11612971]

>>11612817
Imagine responding to shit posts on 4chan.
>>11612828
This

[Anonymous No.11612987]

>>11612474
>>11612467
>tfw you will never do zero-g astrobatics in your underwear with your bros

[Anonymous No.11612997]

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

Based. When is the static fire happening? Thursday/Friday?

>>11612987
Never say never.

[Anonymous No.11613000]

>>11612987
We can all be astronauts together. We can do space aerobatics together. We're all gonna make it (to mars).
That is unless you're too old.

[Anonymous No.11613034]

>>11611809
>if JWST is anything to go by
It isn't anything to go by, though. It's a money farming program more focused on 'developing new technology' than actually producing a working spacecraft.
The real next gen of space telescopes will be monolithic 7.5 meter mirrors inside 8 meter shrouds launched by Starship, with each telescope design having at least ten copies built.

[Anonymous No.11613038]

>>11611874
I don't know about your garbage city but in Houston you can see Orion no problem.

[Anonymous No.11613041]

>>11611812
The 'space mechanisms' meme was solved long ago, you just use ceramic on metal contact for everything. How do you think Canadarm works, or those little spinning antennae on Soyuz, or the bearings on the window shrouds of the cupola module.

[Anonymous No.11613044]

>>11613034
>mass produced 7.5 meter space telescopes
Holy shit, imagine not fighting for Hubble time.

[Anonymous No.11613046]

>>11611975
Name one time major disruption in a scientific field has been a bad thing, I'll wait.

[Anonymous No.11613047]

>>11613034
This. For the last couple of decades space flight has been intentionally going as slowly as possible because doing do is more profitable than delivering final products. Once cheaper access to space happens, it'll be harder to play tortoise with developments and such grant farms will fizzle out.

[Anonymous No.11613053]

>>11612101
You wouldn't see fewer stars, you'd see the same amount of stars plus Starlink sats in the foreground.

[Anonymous No.11613059]

>>11612215
we're running out of interesting shit to look at by chance, and so now we need to catalogue everything
we're developing a fucking machine to count the goddamn stars in the sky

[Anonymous No.11613063]

>>11612216
the meteor shower satellite had its BB gun jam up

[Anonymous No.11613065]

>>11613034
>The real next gen of space telescopes will be monolithic 7.5 meter mirrors inside 8 meter shrouds launched by Starship, with each telescope design having at least ten copies built.
QFT

[Anonymous No.11613067]

>>11612216
>I wish Elon would leave them up bright and shiny so the whole world could see that we've entered into a new era, but i doubt we'll be so lucky. It would no doubt define the generation, and inspiring children and creativity in the arts
It would also blow flat earthers the fuck out.

[Anonymous No.11613068]

>>11612318
>Invasion of the Moon results in yet a third faction of Lunar Separatists
>Led by first mining group to discover a deposit of weapons-grade fissile material
>Oh god the moon pirates have nukes

[Anonymous No.11613070]

Why did it take so long for someone to get this idea

This is so much more useful than moonrocks or a moon base.

[Anonymous No.11613073]

>>11612399
This is the only correct answer, but ironically even asteroid detection would be better off if we used space telescopes, because we'd be able to position them at the Earth-Sun L4 and L5 points in order to see what's approaching Earth from the Sun's direction.

[Anonymous No.11613077]

>>11613070
The moonbase should be like 80% tourism, 20% scientist quarters for the craterscope and other surface experiments. Make it self funding.

[Anonymous No.11613078]

>>11612409
aw shit
nice

[Anonymous No.11613079]

>>11612398
Everyone I know who has ever used Hughesnet has hated it. Rural America alone could support Starlink.

[Anonymous No.11613080]

>>11613070
It's not really a new idea, but it's probably not been put forth as a suggestion directly in a while.

[Anonymous No.11613098]

>>11612409
Man they gotta tighten up security

[Anonymous No.11613100]

>>11612409
wtf is that??

[Anonymous No.11613105]

>>11613100
Dumb SpaceX sysadmins left a corporate fileserver open to the internet and indexable by search engines.

[Anonymous No.11613117]

>>11612476
It's a problem of thrust to mass ratio and delta V per stage.

Needing a stronger stage means more mass in engines and structure, less delta V. However, minimum delta V requirements to achieve orbit are higher, so more stages would be needed. It's the same diminishing returns problem of the rocket equation we're used to dealing with, except worse.

[Anonymous No.11613118]

>>11613079
>Rural America alone could support Starlink
Especially since FCC required full coverage of Alaska. I'm already dreaming of a cabin on Kodiak Island.

[Anonymous No.11613120]

>>11612409

https://www.google.com/search?&q=site%3Aadmin.spacex.com+filetype%3Apdf&oq=site%3Aadmin.spacex.com+filetype%3Apdf&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzoECAAQE1D0CVj0CWCVD2gBcAB4AIABbogB0QGSAQMxLjGYAQCgAQKgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6

link here

[Anonymous No.11613123]

>>11612553
No planet acts like a vacuum cleaner stop perpetuating memes

[Anonymous No.11613127]

>>11612409
I hope they didn't leak anything sensitive.

[Anonymous No.11613128]

>>11613118
Time to build a cabin, Proenneke style and then spend all day every day shitposting.

[Anonymous No.11613131]

>>11612734
Kilopower isn't a radioisotope generator, it's a uranium fueled fission reactor.

[Anonymous No.11613135]

>>11612818
Starlink is too low for that to happen, even in the worst case it will only take five years for all the debris to deorbit

[Anonymous No.11613137]

>>11613079
>rural places
and not even rural places, starlink could put shitty internet providers out of busnis around the world if they get the price right
>us military
They have a massive boner for starlink, from live drone control in 4K from the other side of the world to 4k livefeeds on every soldier uplinked right to the pentagon or whatever.
>massive benefits for ships around the world
Right now satelite internet for ocean ships is downright shit and they would jump fast on something like starlink
>massive benefits for planes
Imagine the blackbox getting uploaded in realtime to servers around the world, and broadband internet on every plane for the passengers.

And a lot of other sectors like the banking world are really looking forward to starlink, a stocktrader with the fastest internet connection can apparently make a lot of money out of other stocktraders who act to late because of lag.
Stocktrade was one of the biggest pushers for submarine communications cable.

Starlink will most likely be the most succesful company musk started yet.

[Anonymous No.11613143]

>>11613137
desu, India and Africa will probably use up most of the bandwidth

It'll be like in the 90s and 00s when all the poorfag countries put cell towers in instead of land lines, because it's way cheaper.

[Anonymous No.11613145]

>>11613068
at last

[Anonymous No.11613169]

https://admin.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/spacex_approved_supplier_list_by_supplier_09.23.19.pdf

Approved supplier list.

[Anonymous No.11613171]

>>11611763
>early evening and morning on certain days in certain conditions
>completely ruined
>luv me LEDs

[Anonymous No.11613184]

>>11612182
Most viable method is making the constellation less reflective which they're already doing

[Anonymous No.11613192]

https://spaceflightnow.com/2020/04/27/falcon-heavy-on-track-for-design-validation-milestone-before-late-2020-launch/

[Anonymous No.11613194]

>>11613120
someone pls download everything so autists at NSF can analyze it later on

[Anonymous No.11613196]

15,600 kg

[Anonymous No.11613200]

>>11613192
so how much more advanced/efficient is military space operations than NASA? Is there a huge technological gap between military and civilian or do they just have more money?

[Anonymous No.11613206]

>>11613070
Old idea, execution too difficult, idea gets abandoned and forgotten about, someone else has the idea, does studies, execution too difficult, etc.

[Anonymous No.11613212]

>>11613200
Atlas V is certainly significantly cheaper per kg to orbit than either Shuttle or SLS, still not as low as SpaceX tough

[Anonymous No.11613216]

>>11613127
Nothing too juicy, mostly standards for their supply chain and lists of acceptable material/component suppliers.

[Anonymous No.11613220]

>>11613212
I'm talking more about payloads

[Anonymous No.11613226]

>>11613220
Payload details are usually classified out the wazoo. As far as the public is concerned it's "here is this mission name, here's some low resolution pictures of what the payload looks like and a broad strokes overview of what it does."

[Anonymous No.11613232]

>>11613068
>moonies immediately nuke israel and hollywood
>earth is easily fixed afterwards
>moonies and marsniggers unite back together
>humanity propels itself into meeting ayys and conquering worlds

[Anonymous No.11613240]

found the scorecard for how SpaceX rate their suppliers
these docs seem to mostly be for Dragon and F9

[Anonymous No.11613251]

>>11613200
The military has lots of money and very little scrutiny. You hear people bitch about the military spending $100 on a hammer when really that's just an accounting smokescreen for the money getting rerouted around to a thousand different black projects at any given time.

Parts of the military are very efficient, parts are very inefficient. I think there was a good example a while back of an old spy satellite getting handed over to NASA for earth observation research, and the satellite was better than anything NASA was running at the time.

[Anonymous No.11613253]

>>11613206
And then execution stops being too difficult when you can just order a few Starship loads of crew and materials to build the thing.

[Anonymous No.11613260]

>>11613251
Those faggots going "DEFUND TEH MILITARIES!" probably do not realize that the military is a big name in the aerospace industry, at least the "aero" part.
You know what could actually be defunded and actually improve America? Welfare.
Is it really necessary to feed ooga boogas who don't really plan to get jobs anyway? They need the tools to bounce back, not just be babysat.

[Anonymous No.11613267]

>>11613253
It'll probably be the first game of lunar tug o' rope.
Only the goal is to get a tie and get the receiver in the center of the crater.

[Anonymous No.11613274]

>>11613267
just put 4 cybertrucks with winches around the crater instead of rovers, attach the line to a stake and hammer it in

[Anonymous No.11613289]

>>11613274
Aren't cybertrucks just basically rovers to begin with? They even come with a miniature quad ATV,
so it's 2 rovers in one package.

[Anonymous No.11613292]

>>11613289
>Aren't cybertrucks just basically rovers to begin with?
Yes, they just need moon wheels and suspension adjustments.

[Anonymous No.11613307]

>>11612987
I want to know how they expect a hundred people to do that lmao

[Anonymous No.11613312]

>>11613070
I feel like there's been a 007 movie with this thing as the final boss base fight scenes.

[Anonymous No.11613315]

SpaceX buys titanium from Niles
my grandma used to live in Youngstown, lol
I've probably driven passed that plant

[Anonymous No.11613321]

>>11613312
That was the Arecibo radio observatory in Puerto Rico which was used for fight scenes in Goldeneye.

[Anonymous No.11613323]

>>11613307
Imagine the smell

[Anonymous No.11613324]

The second space age is coming soon, and I can feel it.
Post obscure ships that should be built IRL in the future.

[Anonymous No.11613325]

>>11613321
Ahhh, thank you. I haven't seen that since it first came out on VHS.

[Anonymous No.11613339]

>>11613321
did they really slide down the dish

[Anonymous No.11613340]

Would this thing actually work IRL?

[Anonymous No.11613345]

>>11613340
no, what the fuck is it for
you're an idiot
that's an atmospheric fighter jet

[Anonymous No.11613346]

>>11613339
Probably. Look at that picture you're replying to. There was all sorts of jungle crap in the dish, so people need to go down periodically and clean it off.

[Anonymous No.11613354]

[Anonymous No.11613358]

>>11613345
I didn't specify that it had to be in orbit.

[Anonymous No.11613360]

>>11613358
atmospheric flight is not spaceflight
unless you're coming back from space, hypersonic reentry is spaceflight

[Anonymous No.11613361]

>>11613340
Outside an atmosphere? Sure, why not? You can fly a fucking Lada 1200 with a rocket strapped to it in space provided it's set up to hold the proper pressure.
Entering and exiting an atmosphere? I doubt it.

Those wings and that body would not fare too well inside an atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.11613364]

>>11613312
>Moonraker
Is that when the moon gets taken over by Canadians and try to shut post all over the solar system?

[Anonymous No.11613367]

>>11613354
>in one of the areas that has like a dozen overlapping connections
absolutely juiced

[Anonymous No.11613368]

>>11613364
yeah

[Anonymous No.11613371]

>>11613361
Is it because it has too many corners? That kind of body does work for hovering vehicles like helicopters, which don't really reach great speed, thus not needing as much of a smooth body. .

[Anonymous No.11613372]

>>11613367
I suspect some of them are going to be direct downlinks into public cloud providers. Look at the overlaps in the DC area, Ohio, and Oregon.

[Anonymous No.11613373]

>>11612467
>Apollo hand-me-downs
>worthy
Mir was better, occupied more often, and mattered more.
ISS is Mir 2 + Space Station Freedom

[Anonymous No.11613375]

Eric Ralph again

[Anonymous No.11613380]

>>11611711
You want to experiences More men than tour dad? Classico American who está hormones for breakfast

[Anonymous No.11613383]

>>11613371
The body is lumpy and the wings are not exactly large and providing a lot of lift. Look at it again.

[Anonymous No.11613385]

>>11613380
Build wall.

[Anonymous No.11613389]

>>11613354
>innocent areas of rural New Mexico

YEAH EXCLUDE EM

[Anonymous No.11613387]

>>11611809
And only Virginis Will care

[Anonymous No.11613392]

>>11613383
Ah, okay.

[Anonymous No.11613394]

>>11613392
The wings are barely large enough to act as control surfaces, so it might fly, provided you were giving it full fucking throttle, upwards. TWR depending of course.

[Anonymous No.11613420]

>>11613120
Would this count as insider trading, if I invested in all or some of the companies that SpaceX considers acceptable manufacturers solely because I believe they will do increasing business with them? It gives insight into possible earnings estimates for those companies if SpaceX suddenly ramps up it's manufacturing etc.

[Anonymous No.11613422]

>>11612752
that would actually be pretty nice

[Anonymous No.11613433]

>>11613420
>does a google search count as insider trading

[Anonymous No.11613446]

>>11613420
given that this research was all done many years ago and these companies are all probably public about the clients they supply, I'd guess not

[Anonymous No.11613462]

>>11613070
>>11613321
The best part about the LCRT is that it's already built, you don't have to make a concrete bowl

Also what are the odds we got a tidally locked moon, we just keep winning the astronomical lottery so you have to take advantage of it

[Anonymous No.11613465]

>>11613420
http://www.space-settlement-institute.org/space-companies.html

Find companies listed here on their supplier list.

[Anonymous No.11613466]

>>11613420
No. Insider trading is very specific. Say I was to tell you that my company was about to acquire Company Y tomorrow and that you should buy in for a rise in stock prices, that'd be one very basic way of doing insider trading.

[Anonymous No.11613467]

>>11613446
This is likely the avenue I'd have to follow up on in case of a hypothetical audit or case.

>>11613433
From sec.gov on Insider Trading:
All information about the Company is considered nonpublic information until it is disseminated in a manner calculated to reach the securities marketplace through recognized channels of distribution and public investors have had a reasonable period of time to react to the information. Generally, information which has not been available to the investing public for at least two (2) full business days is considered to be nonpublic. Recognized channels of distribution include annual reports, prospectuses, press releases, marketing materials, and publication of information in prominent financial publications, such as The Wall Street Journal.

So, unless this info is released via public channel, acting on it alone could legally put you in trouble. Just becuase you can find info out about a company through lax security, doesn't mean it's 'public' knowledge.

[Anonymous No.11613482]

>>11613079
Exactly. They just need to offer ~10Mbps with their ~20-30 ms latency with atleast 200+GB of bandwidth and it will be a sell out in rural area. They can charge $50 for it and everyone will buy it. I'd fucking buy it. I don't give a fuck about speed as much as I do about latency and total bandwidth itself.

[Anonymous No.11613490]

>>11613420
No

[Anonymous No.11613492]

>>11613462
>Also what are the odds we got a tidally locked moon
Our planet probably wouldn't be suitable for life without a large moon, and large moons tend to be tidally locked so pretty high really

[Anonymous No.11613494]

>>11613467
>Generally, information which has not been available to the investing public for at least two (2) full business days is considered to be nonpublic.

This is just ridiculous, all day traders would be insider trading.

Btw, nothing is going to happen to those senators that sold their stock after the covid briefing and nothing is going to happen to you unless you drag an investigator by his tie to your 4chan post

[Anonymous No.11613496]

More SpaceX gateway locations request filed by SpaceX. Here's what the 28 gateway will cover.

[Anonymous No.11613495]

>>11613482
If they do at least 15Mbps symmetrical that's enough for cloud based VDI and thus for running damn near any business anywhere.

[Anonymous No.11613528]

>>11613482
Imagine 10 Mbps with 30:1(industry standard is ~20-50, hughesnet ) overscubscription rate on a 20 Gbps satellite. That's 40K customer coverage per satellite. Each satellite coverage is roughly 500 km radius, with each sat covering roughly 1 state, that's 40K per state x 48 states, that's 2M customer right there without any issue. But if they have 2-3 sat per state, they can either grow their customer base or offer double/triple speed with same oversubscription rate.

[Anonymous No.11613541]

>>11613467
>sec.gov

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

[Anonymous No.11613579]

>>11613496
How many satellites does Starlink have up there already?

[Anonymous No.11613580]

>>11612484
>not even mars microbes, explicitly greys with jump drives

We have aliens but all they do is annoy the Navy

[Anonymous No.11613586]

>>11613579
400 some.

[Anonymous No.11613587]

>>11612701
>Once the CCP puts a team on the Moon

Okay so forty years from now if China even still exists

[Anonymous No.11613588]

>>11613579
~420 give or take handful. They're just waiting for some to raise to proper orbit, that will take few weeks/month+.

[Anonymous No.11613594]

>>11613496
fuck new mexico

[Anonymous No.11613599]

>>11613588
Ion thrusters aren't exactly zippy.

[Anonymous No.11613603]

>>11613580
These things that keep getting spotted by the Navy are what gives me hope about there being regimes of physics and engineering we haven't scratched yet. It makes the ceiling of technological accomplishment feel further away. No matter what they are, the way they are able to accelerate and move in atmosphere and water is insane and the very existence of the phenomena makes me optimistic.

[Anonymous No.11613605]

>>11613143
Remember to be nice to the 60,000 Afro-anons when they arrive

[Anonymous No.11613625]

>>11613605
If they can actually read and write in English well enough to use 4chan, I'll be pleasantly surprised.

[Anonymous No.11613631]

>>11613605
African shitposting is a whole other fucking world, man. Nigerian forums are hilarious and nearly incomprehensible.

[Anonymous No.11613640]

>>11613605
I worry a little about this but alot of libs are about to get redpilled hard. I look forward to seeing facebook comment sections the most.

Starlink posts getting spammed out by Iraqi's is really strange as it is.

[Anonymous No.11613643]

>>11613631
link?

[Anonymous No.11613679]

>>11613643
Narialand

[Anonymous No.11613685]

>>11613373
Mir was tiny, infested with fungus, stank, and even caught fire.

[Anonymous No.11613691]

>>11613528
If they need to increase the subscription ratio, they just need to add more satellites. It's really that simple, more satellites = more targets to share to route packets.

[Anonymous No.11613698]

>>11613685
So it was a space commieblock. Appropriate.

[Anonymous No.11613700]

>>11613679
“ see good question,well 4 me since dis lockdown i notice dat my babe ass is gettin bigger and larger wen eva she move in front of me HOLY SPIRIT MOTHER JESUS i cant help my self and we nak each other 7times a day can u bit dat me and she we are enjoyin our lockdown together wat else do i want she whisper in my ear and said baby i want FG 2 extend dis lockdown dis means dat she is enjoyin my company am a bad motherfu*ker men”

Holy shit

[Anonymous No.11613705]

>>11611975
Muh science

[Anonymous No.11613709]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab_mH8R0KTM

[Anonymous No.11613710]

>>11613691
Probably more efficient to increase the carrying capacity per sat, right? They're gonna have thousands of these and the biggest recurring cost is going to be in reflying them as they de-orbit every few years, handling double the bandwidth with the same number of sats makes more sense to me than flying twice the sats

[Anonymous No.11613715]

>>11613679
God, also just realized a lot of nigerians can speak english.
Or at least it's based on english.

[Anonymous No.11613716]

>>11613705
Daily reminder that science serves humanity. We don’t serve it.

[Anonymous No.11613717]

>>11613700
actually makes more sense than some sci posters
>>11613380

[Anonymous No.11613724]

>>11613716
Other way around.

The society with the best technology will almost always survive longer than other societies.

Thus, there's an evolutionary selection pressure to constantly improve technology.

You can't escape it.

[Anonymous No.11613734]

>>11613724
>Thus, there's an evolutionary selection pressure to constantly improve technology.

Because it’s beneficial. Science serves humanity. It’s a tool. If science isn’t beneficial, it is at best a hobby.

[Anonymous No.11613742]

>>11613724
Technology is not a 1:1 equivalent to science. Astronomy fags REEing over Starlink is a good example of pure science coming into conflict with technology. Despite the fact that advancing technology is ultimately for the betterment of society including its scientific institutions, their mindset has rotted and they cannot accept it.

[Anonymous No.11613778]

How would one build a large terrarium on Mars? Enough for a basic biosphere of plants, small herbivores and carnivores and decomposers
A fully fledged Martian City’s got to have one

[Anonymous No.11613785]

>>11613742
>is a good example of pure science coming into conflict with technology
No, its a good example of how mentally retard people exist even among so called science professionals. They're so fucking emotional and deranged with their arguments.

[Anonymous No.11613787]

>>11613778
All of the ingredients necessary to make polyethylene are there on Mars.

So ideally you could make a transparent dyneema dome.

From there, you have a soil processing station that leeches perchlorates out of the Martian soil, and then dumps the soil in the biodome.

The hard part would be getting the plants to survive using Martian sunlight, which ain't shit compared to earth sunlight.

[Anonymous No.11613797]

>>11613742
Starlink doesn't interfere with virtue-signaling astrofaggots. Once the sats reach final orbit they are a non-issue.

[Anonymous No.11613802]

>>11613778
Lava tube, seal the walls with a spray epoxy or something. Pipe light in from above, supplement with broad spectrum lamps.

[Anonymous No.11613807]

>>11613787
>Iron oxide everywhere
>Perchlorates in the regolith
>Basic hydrocarbons present
Was Mars designed to become a forge world?

[Anonymous No.11613810]

>>11613787
>The hard part would be getting the plants to survive using Martian sunlight, which ain't shit compared to earth sunlight.

There’s bacteria that photosynthesize using the tiny amount of light emitted by hydrothermal vents at the bottom of the ocean.

[Anonymous No.11613813]

>>11613734
I know you think you're being clever, but every society that chooses to discard or even stagnate in science and technology quickly gets overtaken. It's a red queen problem.

>>11613807
Don't forget a shallow enough gravity well that building a mass driver up to the top of Olympus Mons is actually a feasible launch plan.

[Anonymous No.11613816]

>>11613807
Perchlorates are a meme. They can be destroyed by bacteria or even just water.

[Anonymous No.11613819]

>>11613778
Mars essentially has no worthwhile atmosphere. You'd need to make everything as though there's no atmosphere at all like in space. Enjoy your mole-man tunnels.

[Anonymous No.11613823]

>>11613816
But they’re used in a lot of industrial processes and they just lay on the ground

[Anonymous No.11613826]

>>11613813
>every society that chooses to discard or even stagnate in science and technology quickly gets overtaken.
Japan had that problem when they closed up shop and the rest of the world leveled up quickly without them.

[Anonymous No.11613828]

>>11613819
the carbon dioxide atmosphere is just enough to harvest meaningful amounts of carbon for your forges

[Anonymous No.11613831]

>>11613813
>I know you think you're being clever, but every society that chooses to discard or even stagnate in science and technology

Strawman.

[Anonymous No.11613837]

>>11613802
>>11613819
That doesn’t necessarily help show how life would adapt to the Martian surface if you pumped in light all the time
You got to slowly ween them off until they adapt to see the real interesting adaptations

[Anonymous No.11613838]

>>11613831
It's not a strawman unless you assert that the survival of civilization is beneficial to humans.

[Anonymous No.11613860]

>>11613838
Not all scientific endeavors are actually beneficial to humans now or in the near future.

[Anonymous No.11613877]

>UPDATE: Starship SN4 static fire testing was just cancelled for Wednesday night, postponed until Friday night 9pm-6am

https://twitter.com/spacepadreisle/status/1255208065567260673

[Anonymous No.11613878]

>>11613838
>>11613860
First you'd need to define, "beneficial." We may have fucked ourselves over the instant we made fire and things just haven't played out all the way yet.

[Anonymous No.11613881]

>>11613778
You're already going to be processing waste and concentrating solar and everyone's probably going to be in a pressurized, mined out tunnel or lava tube. Just set aside a section where you lay out fertilizer and plant some trees. Once they're grown introduce squirrels or some shit. Voila, green space.

That's not a fully self sustaining no inputs biosphere of course, but you wouldn't build one because there's no reason to do that.

[Anonymous No.11613883]

>>11613462
>Also what are the odds we got a tidally locked moon
Uh, really good. Pretty much every moon in the solar system is tidally locked.

[Anonymous No.11613884]

>>11613877
backup windows on saturday and sunday

[Anonymous No.11613892]

>>11613492
moons are generally tidally locked or are there any in our system which are not?

[Anonymous No.11613895]

>>11613716
science is the closest thing we have to a higher purpose as an intelligent species

[Anonymous No.11613900]

>>11613892
Irregulars because they tend to be distant enough to not lock

[Anonymous No.11613902]

>>11613492
>>11613883
So aliens already built one and we're behind

[Anonymous No.11613912]

>>11613895
Science isn’t any closer to a “higher purpose” than chopping wood or yodeling. Life has no purpose whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.11613914]

>NASA will host a media teleconference at 1 p.m. EDT Thursday, April 30, to announce the companies selected to develop modern human landing systems (HLS) that will carry the first woman and next man to the surface of the Moon by 2024 and develop sustainable lunar exploration by the end of the decade.
>Audio of the call will stream online at:
>https://www.nasa.gov/live
>The teleconference participants are:
> NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine
> Doug Loverro, associate administrator of NASA’s Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate
> Lisa Watson-Morgan, HLS program manager
> Tyler Cochran, HLS contracting officer

[Anonymous No.11613923]

>>11613068
You should read "The moon is a harsh mistress", similar plot but with mass drivers instead of nukes

>>11613883
Yeah I think almost every moon is tidally locked to its planet, the satellite just has to be close enough. Mercury is tidally locked to the Sun if I remember well.

[Anonymous No.11613925]

>>11613742
This.
Modern astronomers REEing about Starlink are only doing so because they are selfish and want to make all the discoveries themselves. If we straight up put astronomy on the back burner for 30 years and focused on physically exploring space, after those 30 years it would be practical to commission a 50 meter far infrared, visible, and ultraviolet space telescope for ~$100 million of today's dollars, because even if we're pessimistic by then we'd be able to easily construct the telescope frame and sun-shields out of normal steel on orbit for dirt cheap launch costs, then just launch and install the mirrors.

[Anonymous No.11613930]

>>11613914
I'm only working one day this week, and it JUST HAS TO FUCKING BE THURSDAY, APRIL 30th

[Anonymous No.11613933]

>>11613914
Thoughts on who wins?

[Anonymous No.11613939]

>>11613914
I really want a Starship to be waiting for the first lander.
>it's just a cargo support mission dudes :)
>waving its big stainless steel dick around in the background of your historic footage

[Anonymous No.11613940]

>>11613923
>similar plot but with mass drivers instead of nukes

[Anonymous No.11613949]

>>11613933
Boeing, obviously.
But they will have to share the cake more then they are used to.

[Anonymous No.11613969]

>>11613778
It's not difficult at all, especially since you can just add more CO2/nitrogen/water/oxygen if need be at any time using machines.

Even if you don't manage anything whatsoever, it's still easy. Pic related is my little terrarium ecosphere, it's got earthworms and isopods and snails and springtails and more, not to mention plants. I made it two and a half years ago by putting dirt in a jar, no other intervention except for every now and then I rotate it so sunlight hits it different. All the plants and animals were already in the soil as seeds or eggs, I have not opened that thing since the first time I closed it, and the lid forms an airtight seal.

[Anonymous No.11613974]

>>11613969
That's pretty based.

[Anonymous No.11613975]

>>11613810
No dummy, they use chemosynthesis to generate energy by using the energy released when certain chemicals in the water leaving the vent break down.

[Anonymous No.11613978]

>>11613819
It's the perfect amount of atmosphere, enough that it lets you scrub off 99% of orbital velocity with no propulsion required, yet not enough to cause significant drag during ascent to orbit.

[Anonymous No.11613987]

>>11613978
>>11613837
>>11613828
Who gives a flying shit about that? I'm talking about city structures and Delta-P.

[Anonymous No.11613988]

>>11613969
>pic
Needs moar light!

[Anonymous No.11613992]

>>11613819
>Enjoy your mole-man tunnels.
but i will
>>11613978
this. mars is purpose built to be the input/output hub of the inner solar system

[Anonymous No.11614003]

>>11613987
i'm gonna put my delta-p in your mole-man tunnel

[Anonymous No.11614004]

>>11613975
>No dummy, they use chemosynthesis to generate energy by using the energy released when certain chemicals in the water leaving the vent break down.

Some bacteria do that too, but some actually use PHOTOSYNTHESIS. Look.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1166624/

[Anonymous No.11614005]

>>11613881
>Just set aside a section where you lay out fertilizer and plant some trees
Nah, what you want to start off with are perennial grasses. These plants form hardy root networks even in poor, sandy soils, and under optimal conditions can produce very large amounts of biomass very quickly.
The first thing you want to farm on Mars if you are trying to build soil is hay. This hay would be harvested and dried, and used as fodder to mix with human waste and scrap food in compost heaps, which convert the mixture into that crumbly black nutrient-packed material that the vast majority of plants either prefer or depend on.
Grass barely uses any soil nutrients to grow, and thus requires very little fertilization to perpetuate high-yield crops of hay.
Trees by comparison produce hardly any annual fodder material, as most of it stays locked up as wood in the living parts of the tree. They can however produce very large amounts of very high quality foods in the form of fruits and nuts.
The ideal non-hydroponic and non-aeroponic food generating system to use on Mars in my opinion is to use grasses as fodder to generate compost to feed fruit trees and generate food, which is then eaten and the leftovers and waste products are used to close the loop.

[Anonymous No.11614013]

>>11613992
>>11613978
I think I'd rather just built a space station on Ceres. You'll need to have something spinning anyway due to Jello babies.

>>11614003
You jest but there's a Heinlein story like that. The guy uses his ass cheek to plug a leak in one of the tunnels until help arrives. I can't remember if it was on Mars or the Moon though.

[Anonymous No.11614016]

>>11614005
>The first thing you want to farm on Mars if you are trying to build soil is hay

Are you telling me you can't grow corn or whatever on virgin Martian soil?

Shit.

[Anonymous No.11614038]

>>11614005
>>11614016
You really don't need soil to grow plants/food though. Plants also uptake a huge amount of bullshit chemicals from contaminated soils. Bioremediation uses plants to clean contaminated soils. You'd grow the plants and fungi in the soil, harvest the plants, throw them into a landfill (contaminate some other faggot's land with it) and repeat the process until the soil is clean of pollution. Due to this action, trying to grow food you'll be eating using Martian "soil" is probably going to be pretty bad for your health. You are better off making your own "soil" while doing one of the many types of hydroponics you could be doing.

[Anonymous No.11614043]

>>11614013
>Ceres
you gain nothing from this, you just sacrifice some dV and a shitload of time for no good reason.
>You'll need to have something spinning anyway due to Jello babies.
if mars turns out to be bad for development, we can literally just spin some shit on mars or on a habitat around mars. you gonna go to ceres so you can spin some shit? i hope you didn't buy the expanse meme

[Anonymous No.11614048]

>>11614043
spinning is illegal on planetary surfaces, anon
all babies must go to the orbital spinstations or we'll drop rocks on you

[Anonymous No.11614052]

>>11613923
>Mercury is tidally locked to the Sun if I remember well.
You almost remember well.
Mercury isn't tidally locked, it's in a 3:2 spin-orbit resonance with the Sun, whereby it rotates exactly three times for every two times it orbits. Mercury would probably be tidally locked if it weren't for the eccentricity of its orbit. The speeding up and slowing down of Mercury as it goes through its elliptical orbit means that being tidally locked to the Sun would actually be a higher tidal energy state than its current resonance, and since it would have passed through the 3:2 resonance first before reaching a 1:1 resonance in any case as it was slowed down, it remained stuck at 3:2 ever since.
If we had unlimited industrial capability and really wanted to, we could probably accelerate Mercury enough to overcome the stabilizing tidal forces keeping its orbit elliptical, and put it into a nice circular one, at which point the new minimum tidal energy state would be a 1:1 resonance and Mercury would slowly go into tidal lock. That would be convenient for colonization efforts, because in many ways living on the permanently dark side of a tidally locked Mercury would actually be easier than living on the surface of the Moon, or in the outer solar system. The extreme cold would increase the effectiveness of radiators, and the very powerful sunlight could be reflected down onto the night side to power colonies, and even warm large habitats directly. Of course if we could actually shove Mercury around like that we'd probably be past wanting to colonize planets for the most part, and would just disassemble Mercury for materials instead.

[Anonymous No.11614088]

>>11614016
It's literally just sand and rocks, anon. You can do the experiment yourself, go get some sand and rocks, wash the organic matter out because that's cheating, then plant whatever seeds you can get your hands on. 99.9% of crops won't grow, a good amount of non-food species will. It doesn't really matter though, because for one thing there are a number of crop species that you can grow using hydroponics alone, and for another it'd only take a few weeks for a perennial grass plot to be ready for first harvest, and a few weeks after that you'd have some still-shitty but workable soils that you could plant crops in. Remember, on Mars we're doing everything indoors, so seasons follow our schedule.

>>11614038
>Plants also uptake a huge amount of bullshit chemicals from contaminated soils.
Yes but I'm just assuming that we're going to treat the dirt we dig up by washing with water first anyway. It's not that soil remediation requires anything more difficult than a wash plant, it's that a wash plant is more expensive than just planting four sunflower crops on contaminated land on Earth. On Mars that option actually becomes more expensive, so we'll just do it quickly ourselves. Tailings from excavation through bedrock shouldn't contain toxins anyway, it's just basalt, so if we're willing to pulverize it a bit more we can produce very serious amounts of soil 'skeleton' material without real difficulty.

>>11613988
Sorry, the sun came out but the glass fogged up, here's a pic of one of the little dudes in there instead. It's at least 2nd generation by the way, the isopods reproduced last summer when it was warmer and the plants were growing faster than they are now.

[Anonymous No.11614100]

>>11614043
>if mars turns out to be bad for development, we can literally just spin some shit on mars or on a habitat around mars
This, Mars already has two multi-quadrillion ton rocks in extremely circular orbits with zero inclination to the equator for us to mine and use to construct a huge number of orbital habitats, what more do you want.

[Anonymous No.11614108]

>>11613881
It's pretty fucking scary we are incapable of building a fully self-sustaining biosphere on Earth.
Not that a colony wouldn't be getting inputs but it seems like a solid avenue of study rather than another "simulate mars journey and mental health" press opportunity.
The only people who have really tried were all fucked up US hippies and freaks working on biosphere 1/2. And there's a lot of evidence it wasn't even hermetically sealed anyway.

[Anonymous No.11614121]

>>11613826
Japan is a technological powerhouse anon, along with some of the best quality of life metrics on Earth. Stop reading pop-economics bullshit which wanks off over imaginary metrics. That magical inflation number is never coming back for the rest of the Western world either now.

[Anonymous No.11614131]

>>11614121
I'm pretty sure he's talking about Japan before the Meiji restoration.

[Anonymous No.11614132]

>>11614108
Those projects were complete jokes. Thrown together without consideration of material choice; of course you're going to have a carbon deficit if you make a good portion of your 'biosphere' out of fresh concrete. Dumb.
In reality the 'sealed' ecosystems we build in space won't be truly sealed at all, we'll always have the ability to stockpile additional resources to be injected as needed, and we'll always have the ability to remove excesses as they build up, maintaining a fine-tuned balance. Also, pretty much nothing will be made of concrete because calcium carbonate isn't nearly as common elsewhere in the solar system apart from Earth. We'll be building out of aluminum and steel and basalt fiber, mostly.

[Anonymous No.11614140]

>>11614005
other anon said it first but there are monumentally better ways to actually grow industrially. this is purely for green spaces. that's what a true self sustaining terrarium would be anyway, neat but ultimately just something to enjoy, not a production platform.

>>11614108
ultimately the challenges of doing it at scale on earth are functionally the same as doing it at scale anywhere else, with the exception that it's easier to source all of the primary materials when they all share a gravity well. it's something we'll have to tackle eventually with habitats if they want to achieve anything like self-sustainability, but on mars it will be easier to source raw resources than it will be to set up a biosphere

[Anonymous No.11614143]

>>11613603
Yeah, stuff that seems to ignore atmospheric/fluid drag is fucking wild

[Anonymous No.11614155]

>>11614140
>there are monumentally better ways to actually grow industrially

how so

[Anonymous No.11614160]

>>11614140
>other anon said it first but there are monumentally better ways to actually grow industrially
Of course, and I agree. What I was describing is a means of generating the soil needed to grow plants that require soil, like trees, which would obviously be among what you'd want in a park or other green space.

[Anonymous No.11614166]

>>11614155
Use leeching to extract nutrient elements from raw bulk soil, remove toxic compounds and heavy metals, add nutrients to water system of hydroponic farm, extract maximum yield from those nutrients with minimum waste.

[Anonymous No.11614177]

>>11614155
hydro-, aeroponics. soil growing only makes sense when you have acres and acres of pre-processed soil like earth, it's more resource intensive and overgrows extraneous systems you don't care about.

[Anonymous No.11614187]

>>11614132
>>11614140
Biodomes would probably be added to existing cities as natural research station and recreation areas rather than an essential part of a colony effort.
Some resources would be collected like wood, throwing detritus with shit into HTL/Biodigesters to make biocrude for plastics

[Anonymous No.11614208]

>>11614108
Building and entirely self sustaining biosphere is impossible because such a thing cannot exist within the known regime of physics. Everything has loss, every process incurs waste, Earth itself isn't a closed biosphere because the biosphere consumes energy from the sun to survive. Even the most efficient Martian colony will need regular inputs of soil, atmosphere, water, electrical power, etc.

[Anonymous No.11614224]

>>11614208
self-sustaining in terms of mass, anon
they plan to get their energy needs from the sun

[Anonymous No.11614225]

>>11614208
>being this anal about the definition
Dude, at most we need a biosphere that can be self contained enough to only require energy input. Your comment is utterly pointless.

[Anonymous No.11614282]

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1255235589655445504

[Anonymous No.11614320]

Why is no-one here talking about the Long March 9?

[Anonymous No.11614333]

>>11614088
>Sorry, the sun came out but the glass fogged up, here's a pic of one of the little dudes in there instead.
I was refering to the length of the plants that need a bit more light. It is a bit of a meme over on the Homegrowmen: >>>/out/1744638

[Anonymous No.11614334]

>>11614282
Is this supposed to mean something?

[Anonymous No.11614336]

>>11614334
Elon bought 3 million dollars of batteries and electric motors from himself for Starship

[Anonymous No.11614345]

>>11614108
>we are incapable
We are capable. It is rather easy, but you really need to know that the Pauly Shore movie "Bio-Dome" really is how bullshit those projects were. Your last sentence is a big clue as to why those failed.

[Anonymous No.11614354]

>>11614121
Anon, learns yous some history: >>11614131
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meiji_Restoration#Foreign_influence
>The Japanese knew they were behind the great Western powers, when US Commodore Matthew C. Perry came to Japan in 1853 in large warships with armaments and technology that far outclassed those of Japan with the intent to conclude a treaty that would open up Japanese ports to trade.[1] Figures like Shimazu Nariakira concluded that "if we take the initiative, we can dominate; if we do not, we will be dominated", leading Japan to "throw open its doors to foreign technology." Observing Japan's response to the Western powers, Chinese general Li Hongzhang considered Japan to be China's "principal security threat" as early as 1863, five years before the Meiji Restoration.[2]

At least they were wise enough to know how big of a bullet they dodged and came up to spec with everyone else.

[Anonymous No.11614355]

>>11614336
I think it's just not a surprise around here because we've seen the motors and batteries on the ship already. It's a good reminder that everything is pointed at the same place, though

>>11614320
For a while it was a big chinaboo meme, kinda died down

[Anonymous No.11614356]

>>11614355
three million dollars is way more than I thought those would be worth

[Anonymous No.11614358]

>>11614208
>Building and entirely self sustaining biosphere is impossible because such a thing cannot exist within the known regime of physics.
This is what autism looks like in the written form. This anon, will not quite understand why most likely.

[Anonymous No.11614366]

>>11614356
Every one of those packs is a ~80 - ~100k car that didn't get made, and it's multiple per ship, it doesn't surprise me that it adds up desu

[Anonymous No.11614383]

>>11614155
First comes aeroponics.
Later comes aquaponics.
Much later comes terraponics.
Much much late comes terraculture.

[Anonymous No.11614390]

>>11614336
You need to know that all Elon's companies have only one goal. That is to make and/or research things needed getting to Mars and building a Mars colony.

[Anonymous No.11614391]

>>11614208
>Earth itself isn't a closed biosphere because the biosphere consumes energy from the sun to survive

You mean like how there’s still a Sun in the sky on Mars....?

> Even the most efficient Martian colony will need regular inputs of soil, atmosphere, water

Those can be recycled infinitely without any actual loss. Atoms don’t just fucking vanish

[Anonymous No.11614392]

>>11614383
Aero and hydroponics will both be used initially, they have different use cases for different crops but both are efficient enough to not really make any difference. I also like to think that shrimp and fish will come very early because they are extremely useful for recycling nutrients and we can blow muh bugs faggots out.

[Anonymous No.11614395]

>>11614390
I know
3 million dollars is still a lot of money for a handful of batteries

[Anonymous No.11614396]

>>11614336
HELP SEC, ELON IS USING ONE OF HIS COMPANIES TO PROP UP FAILING #TSLAQ

SHUT THIS CRIMINAL DOWN NOW

[Anonymous No.11614411]

>>11614392
I've seen setups that use fish in the loop, I can't remember the use case but it's a thing

[Anonymous No.11614413]

What happened to those /sci/ anons who claimed to be building their own rockets? Did they succeed?

[Anonymous No.11614419]

>>11614391
>Those can be recycled infinitely without any actual loss. Atoms don’t just fucking vanish
Eh...the main problem with that sort of thing is leaking, but as long as you have enough input energy you can recycle pretty much indefinitely.

>>11614395
>want to have energy security, due to storms constantly fucking with the grid
>would like to live off grid
>batteries and panels cost more than just using utility power
>batteries need replaced at such frequency it just tanks the entire cost factor
Batteries man, fucking batteries. They are nothing more than a massive $$$ sinkhole. I can't imagine how much the latest tech in batteries would cost for the same amp hour rating.

>>11614392
>>11614411
That's "aquaponics" the combining of plants, bacteria, and aquatic life like crayfish, shrimp, fish, etc. It is a pretty neat system, but you need a rather large system to help prevent minor problems killing everything super fast.

[Anonymous No.11614422]

>>11613710
more sats = more visible above any particular point on earth = more sats to share the bandwidth
Sure, better sats work too, but the number of sats any customer can use at any moment is not inherently fixed, unlike a GEO slot.

[Anonymous No.11614430]

>>11614422
I just really hope that the IPs we are given aren't all banned fucking everywhere due to asshats. I had that problem when I tried Hughesnet. It was like I was paying them an ass load of money for a dynamic pool of IPs that were all banned literally everywhere. Then again that is happening now with my regular ISP.

[Anonymous No.11614431]

>>11614419
>Eh...the main problem with that sort of thing is leaking, but as long as you have enough input energy you can recycle pretty much indefinitely.

Whatever tiny amount of material is lost is negligible in comparison to the enormous resources of the Martian environment.

[Anonymous No.11614436]

>>11614413
I'm low on funds and lack good equipment.

[Anonymous No.11614437]

>>11614430
Just use a proxy lmao

[Anonymous No.11614444]

>>11614437

[Anonymous No.11614452]

>>11614320
It's a Chinese rocket, so there isn't much available to talk about. Plus, it's not reusable despite it's first launch being in the 2030s.

[Anonymous No.11614455]

>>11613969
>>11614088

[Anonymous No.11614463]

>>11614436
How far did you get? Did you expect this to be cheap lol?

[Anonymous No.11614469]

>>11614413
>"I swear officer it is not a pipebomb!"

[Anonymous No.11614484]

>>11614463
>How far did you get?
I got the engine, propellant tank, and ignition system. Just need to get the plumbing components. Finding reasonably priced valves that could be remotely controlled is tough.

>Did you expect this to be cheap lol?
Kinda. I was buying the cheapest I could find, but the propellant tank ended up being more than double it's price. Also, the design might be too simple and cheap as I talked about the design with some experienced engineers and they showed plenty of doubt. Considered starting over, but I have no job and a limited money reserve.

[Anonymous No.11614486]

>>11614436
Shit, I wanted to make a fancy stainless steel water distiller for camping that uses lots of coils and a refractory stack. I priced it and it would have been about $8k in parts due to how special the parts are. I can't imagine just wanting to make a properly sized rocket engine.

[Anonymous No.11614491]

>>11614486
>refractory
reflux*

[Anonymous No.11614492]

>>11614484
You bought the engine? or you made it yourself?

[Anonymous No.11614496]

>>11614430
Time for ipv6 nigga

[Anonymous No.11614506]

How much mass would you need to cut from the 150t payload to achieve the faster 3-4 month trajectory?

[Anonymous No.11614510]

>>11614506
the goal is zero

[Anonymous No.11614514]

>>11614419
>but you need a rather large system to help prevent minor problems killing everything super fast.
That's true of basically all living off earth problems. Scale brings margins of error.

[Anonymous No.11614515]

>>11614496
I've had IPv6 for years but chinkmoot won't turn it on.

[Anonymous No.11614519]

NEW
>>11614518
>>11614518
>>11614518

[Anonymous No.11614534]

>>11614514
Yeah, but aquaponics is not forgiving at all. That is the biggest problem it has. You need to baby it by testing all the time.

[Anonymous No.11614536]

>>11614333
Oh, haha. Yeah, winter where I live lasts a long while, and during that time the jar tend to get maybe 2 hours of sunlight with another 14 hours of indirect indoor lighting. Definitely stresses the plants a little but they're been growing around and around that thing for ~32 months so far.

[Anonymous No.11614543]

>>11614536
Good job, regardless. If you make another one, JB Weld a container to the lid, with hole in lid, and use the jar upside down. You'll have more root space for the plant and the lid won't be in the way of light reaching it.

[Anonymous No.11614546]

>>11614444
based quads

[Anonymous No.11614550]

>>11614543
Nice idea, I'll keep that in mind

[Anonymous No.11614581]

>>11614550
Oh and if you still want to see the root space, just use another shorter glass jar as the one you epoxy to the other lid.

[Anonymous No.11614876]

>>11613785
>>11613797
>>11613925
Reading these posts shows how truly deluded muskfags are