/sfg/ - Space Flight General

[Anonymous No.11658134]

The best method of spaceflight edition

Previous thread >>11653638

[Anonymous No.11658147]

>>11658134
Not so fast.

[Anonymous No.11658158]

>>11658147
That's great for interstellar spaceflight and even interplanetary spaceflight, but not very good for military spaceflight.

[Anonymous No.11658173]

Soon.

[Anonymous No.11658182]

>>11658134
Based and Orionpilled

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtYisD7RqWk

[Anonymous No.11658184]

>>11658182
Based

[Anonymous No.11658205]

Alright bros prediction time.
What will the first extra-terrestrial armed conflict be?
My guess:
>Time
c. 2050-2070
>Location
Moon

>Participants
US and China

>Casus Belli
Mining territory disputes

>Casualties
Probably minimal lives lost, billions of property and infrastructure destroyed

[Anonymous No.11658215]

>>11658205
>Time
2040-2041

>Location
Mars and Earth

>Participants
Sovreign nations of Mars vs Earth ZOG

>Casus Belli
Physical removal of juden and establishment of free Mars nations states

>Casualties
Elon fires experimental NSWR RKV which leads to extinction event on Earth. Small fighting on Mars as ZOG elements are pruged.

[Anonymous No.11658218]

>>11658205
Pretty much that, except I'd expect in the hundreds of thousands dead, mainly on the chinese side.

[Anonymous No.11658228]

>>11658205
Some new arrival to an established Lunar base getting shanked over an alleged food theft.

[Anonymous No.11658229]

>>11658215
I think any ethnonationalist resistance would mainly take place in the outer solar system.

[Anonymous No.11658244]

>>11658229
The reality is no one off Earth is going to have enough time on their hands to seethe over /pol/ shit. They'll have too much to do, personnel will be critical, and if anyone is getting tossed out of airlocks it will be those who can't carry their weight regardless of all other factors.

[Anonymous No.11658249]

>>11658244
>personnel will be critical, and if anyone is getting tossed out of airlocks it will be those who can't carry their weight regardless of all other factors

So what you're saying is that it's going to be a white ethnostate.

[Anonymous No.11658252]

>>11658229
ethnonationalist sentiment is a symptom of a decadent society that has lost touch with the reality of what actually threatens civilization. When you have the ever-present threat of the bleakness of space, it's easy to put other problems in perspective.

[Anonymous No.11658253]

>>11658244
At first yes, but eventually pretty much every ideology that exists will have it's own small colonies.

[Anonymous No.11658255]

>>11658252
>>11658249
>>11658244
>>11658229
Let's just steer clear of politics before the entire thread gets derailed honestly.

[Anonymous No.11658259]

>>11658244
>and if anyone is getting tossed out of airlocks it will be those who can't carry their weight regardless of all other factors

Three guesses on which races are going to be vastly over representated in spacings.

[Anonymous No.11658260]

>>11658205
did someone say moon piracy?

[Anonymous No.11658261]

>>11658253
Most likely, yeah. There won't be a unified Martian ideology, more like a collection of Martian citystates. Optimistically, they'll spend most of their time bickering about each other but will respond with a unified front against external existential threats.

[Anonymous No.11658265]

>>11658253
This is honestly one of the most exciting things for me, it’ll be like the puritans in the new world or any other group that wanted to escape the old one and create new communities from scratch. We could have the space version of Jonestown, there will inevitably charismatic leaders convincing their followers to come with them and build their own isolated city states

[Anonymous No.11658266]

>>11658147
But how do you decelerate? Atmospheric braking or a series of gravity slingshots?
Even if you had another laser beam photon cannon at the destination you would need to time the pulses and decel beam portions in a predictive manner so the particles would begin to strike the probe way before reaching the destination.
Unless this is a one way trip type thing, then it's always seemed neat to me, the whole 'lightsail' concept. Speaking of which, what is the latest on Light Sail?

[Anonymous No.11658267]

>>11658265
Feudalism will make a big come back with the large distances.

[Anonymous No.11658269]

>>11658266
>Even if you had another laser beam photon cannon at the destination you would need to time the pulses and decel beam portions in a predictive manner so the particles would begin to strike the probe way before reaching the destination.
That's generally the idea, yeah. The biggest problem with a beamed power highway plan has always been how to build the remote stations. Once those are operational it's easy.

[Anonymous No.11658270]

>>11658265
And just like the world today, the space force will be used to beat down non compliant space nations because everyone has to be a neoliberal democracy.

[Anonymous No.11658272]

>>11658134
Remember to get a girlfriend/wife and have many babies like Elon Musk

[Anonymous No.11658276]

>>11658270
Unlikely. The distances involved are just too great, and there will be too many non-compliant nations to take down all of them.

[Anonymous No.11658278]

>>11658270
I’d rather them be neoliberal democracies than insane communist dystopias. China belongs nowhere else but on the ground.

[Anonymous No.11658280]

>>11658278
*in the

[Anonymous No.11658282]

>>11658278
>The only alternative to muh democracy is a communist tyranny

Fuck off retard

[Anonymous No.11658283]

>>11658280
Nah, the people can be rescued in some sense. It’s rarely talked about but Protestant Christianity is spreading among the Chinese population way faster than COVID-19 ever did. There’s at least sixty million of them now and the number increases by 10%~ annually.

[Anonymous No.11658286]

>>11658282
>The only alternative to muh democracy is a communist tyranny

Yeah, there’s also Islamic tyrannies and far right Nazi shit. Those should be stomped too.

[Anonymous No.11658293]

>>11658286
>more strawmen

[Anonymous No.11658294]

>>11658147
>No beam spreading
So this is a superweapon right?

[Anonymous No.11658298]

>>11658286
Stop bringing up political shit all the time, keep that in /etm/ and other /pol/ space threads if there are any others.

[Anonymous No.11658299]

>>11658294
Anything capable of accelerating a ship to decent fractions of c is almost by definition a superweapon. Even the solar wind isn't immune to this, with Coronal Mass Ejections being deadly as shit in space.

[Anonymous No.11658300]

>>11658293
>more strawmen

There is no strawman. The only “alternatives” to democracy in the world today are Islamism, communism, and reactionarism. Maybe monarchy but those are really few in number and the idea has basically no support outside of those countries.

[Anonymous No.11658301]

>>11658294
Yeah, if it works. Haven't seen any progress on this idea since it got NIAC funding in 2018.

[Anonymous No.11658304]

>>11658294
Death Star IRL

[Anonymous No.11658307]

>>11658300
There are a lot more political ideologies, just they don't have the numbers to start their own countries (especially since all the land on earth is pretty much claimed). The advent of cheap space travel and the colonization of the solar system will mean even relatively cliche ideologies today will be able to start their own colonies in small asteroids. Also, "reactionarism" is monarchism.

[Anonymous No.11658309]

>>11658300
Reminder that most of the middle east was fairly functional until we fucked everything up.

[Anonymous No.11658310]

>>11658307
>The advent of cheap space travel and the colonization of the solar system will mean even relatively cliche ideologies today will be able to start their own colonies in small asteroids.

I would agree with that. I’ve toyed with this idea before. Can’t wait to see the colony the Mormon Church establishes. They’ll breed like rats.

[Anonymous No.11658313]

>>11658310
Mormons will likely be one of the most powerful religious factions, alongside Islam and Judaism.

[Anonymous No.11658314]

>>11658310
I was about to mention the Mormons, they’ll probably become a substantial force in the coming generations. Their whole thing was fucking off to Utah away from everyone else but the US eventually caught up to them. This time they’ll have a lot more room

[Anonymous No.11658320]

>>11658310
I have to give them credit in this regard, Mormons will perform well in space. They have that frontier mentality.

[Anonymous No.11658330]

>>11658313
>>11658314
>>11658320
Based. Mormons are too crazy for me. I’ll have to find the normal Jesus freak dome.

[Anonymous No.11658334]

Will scientology send interstellar probes to find remnants of xenu's galactic confederacy?

[Anonymous No.11658340]

>>11658147
Yeah, it's really not that fast.

[Anonymous No.11658342]

Oh I'm sorry, were you here to see discussion about spaceflight and not read the inane political opinions of retards?

[Anonymous No.11658343]

>>11658342
Spaceflight is inherantly political

[Anonymous No.11658345]

>>11658342
It always happens.

[Anonymous No.11658353]

>there will be natsoc colonies you can join
>there will probably be a right wing HAL-9000 known as POL-9000

[Anonymous No.11658355]

>>11658342
So how about that stainless steel?

[Anonymous No.11658368]

>>11658355
It does a much better job than wooden doors at containing volatile gases.

[Anonymous No.11658369]

>>11658368
>OY VEY DELET THIS

[Anonymous No.11658372]

>>11658334
What has Scientology done lately? Are they even growing still? Seems like everyone knows what they’re up to nowadays

[Anonymous No.11658378]

>>11658372
I have no clue, but Tom Cruise is going to space so that's probably gonna be a big point of advertisement for them.

[Anonymous No.11658385]

>>11658320
That was one of the things I liked about The Expanse, it showed what a cathedral in space looks like... and how useful spin gravity is in the absence of thrust.

[Anonymous No.11658391]

>>11658355
Unironically see a future where stainless steel is the only non-meme bulk material for spacecraft. You use it for everything from Starship and its derivatives, obviously, to NTRs for intermediate distances all the way up to giant fuckoff Orion craft to go even further beyond.

[Anonymous No.11658392]

/sfg/ autism-made Conestoga 1620 using rocket candy and nitrous propane slurry when?

[Anonymous No.11658422]

Here we go

[Anonymous No.11658428]

Based

[Anonymous No.11658429]

>>11658422

[Anonymous No.11658435]

>>11658428

[Anonymous No.11658436]

>>11658392
Why not methalox? LNG tanks are probably stupid cheap right now with the oil crash. Just for the Hank Hill memes?

[Anonymous No.11658438]

>>11658428
>Ok bitch, now I'm going to pull fucking EVERYTHING from your shithole state

[Anonymous No.11658445]

>>11658438
He pinned the tweet, too. One thing people haven't priced in yet about decoupling from China is that most businesses will have no fucking reason to be on the west coast at all other than inertia, and so will leave.

[Anonymous No.11658450]

>>11658436
Solids are basically a tube full of shit with a nozzle on the end. A methalox rocket requires actual technical ability.

[Anonymous No.11658459]

>>11658428
kek mad man

[Anonymous No.11658460]

>>11658436
>Just for the Hank Hill memes?
/sfg/ memes. An anon here keeps suggesting mixing nitrous oxide and propane together as a pseudo monopropellant as if that mixture won't have a tendency to spontaneously react.

[Anonymous No.11658464]

>>11658428
Who the hell is that?

[Anonymous No.11658469]

>>11658464
A footnote.

[Anonymous No.11658474]

>>11658464
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorena_Gonzalez
A Democrat.

[Anonymous No.11658480]

>>11658474
Oh, okay. California is a trainwreck with absurdly high costs of living because of excessive taxation and regulation, so whatever.

[Anonymous No.11658495]

>>11658480
It's funny
all this could have been solved if the people actually rose up when the biggest transfer of wealth to corporate america ever happened
but instead people only rose up to get their shitty jobs back
fucking joke, on both sides of the aisle

[Anonymous No.11658535]

>>11658495
yup

[Anonymous No.11658538]

>sn4 hop
>elon dumping california
>obama getting locked up

this is gonna be a good month

[Anonymous No.11658542]

>>11658460
Oh, I see, the plan is to fill something the size of five ICBMs with a horrific hell sludge made from blackpowder rocket candy, nitrous oxide, and propane. That sounds lovely.

[Anonymous No.11658548]

>>11658372
They're just a real estate investment firm now for the most part. They don't really require any new followers.

[Anonymous No.11658552]

>>15330667

This is a science board. You can't be retarded and post here.

[Anonymous No.11658554]

>>11658538
you forgot Dragon launch

[Anonymous No.11658558]

>>11658552
Reminder that the earth is flat and no one buy your NASA lies anymore

[Anonymous No.11658559]

>>11658542
When you put it like that you make it sound like a war crime or something.

[Anonymous No.11658561]

>>11658559
It's only a war crime if you miss orbit.

[Anonymous No.11658571]

Where do you niggas think China's Long March 5 main stage will crash tomorrow? Hopefully some stream is available.

[Anonymous No.11658575]

>>11658571
Taipei.

[Anonymous No.11658581]

>>11658438
She's not even from the district Tesla is based in, a district who's mayor is making a lot of noise about figuring out a way to get Tesla back open and up to 30% productivity so the don't have a face a mob of ten thousand jobless citizens. The only thing she's known for is backing a bill that fucked over thousands of gig employees by strangulating the number of hours businesses in CA could hire contractors for, sending probably upwards of five thousand people into poverty.

[Anonymous No.11658585]

so is any other nation besides the US working on some SLS/BFR type rocket?

[Anonymous No.11658590]

>>11658585
I'm sure plenty of them have some kind of proposition but the most ambitious project so far have been Falcon clones from Europe and China which will probably take another decade to see any progress. The Chinese one will anyways because whatever else I hate about pinkos, they can at least work fast when properly motivated. I have no faith currently that the Euros will be relevant to anything in space in the near future.

[Anonymous No.11658592]

>>11658585
China is working on the Long March 9, which is super heavy lift capable
India is contemplating it
I don't know about Russia but puppeting the corpse of the Soviet space program can only take them so far

[Anonymous No.11658593]

>>11658585
Russia has the Yenisei (A.K.A. Soyuz-5 Super Heavy) and China has the Long March 9.

[Anonymous No.11658607]

I wish russia would revive the buran but actually use boosters with wings this time.

[Anonymous No.11658611]

>>11658158
The massive laser would have ample military applications, though.

[Anonymous No.11658648]

>>11658593
>N1 Heavy
So that's how Klingon ship design started.

[Anonymous No.11658689]

Will they do a static fire tonight?

[Anonymous No.11658698]

>>11658428
>>11658474
>48 years old
>acts like an 18 year old
the absolute state of american government

[Anonymous No.11658711]

>>11658689
raptor being installed, so maybe tomorrow night?

[Anonymous No.11658713]

>>11658182
orion is the ultimate brute force solution to spaceflight.

[Anonymous No.11658722]

There's an interesting company that wants to take advantage of how some radioactive isotopes piss off positrons as they decay to build an antimatter-catalyzed fusion rocket. You cool the positrons down and slam them into deuterium and you get the benefits of the retarded energy density of antimatter but without the nightmare of having to try to contain it all in a raw form.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH70-FdP-os

Ex-BO guy and test pilot. Sounds really challenging.

[Anonymous No.11658730]

>>11658722
Anti-matter reaction drives are 50 years ago at least.

[Anonymous No.11658736]

Guys I think I cracked propellantless space engines.

[Anonymous No.11658780]

it blob

[Anonymous No.11658781]

>>11658260
they can plunder all the moon whaling ships

[Anonymous No.11658786]

>>11658607
switchblade boosters are kino
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6GG8KHDjZk

[Anonymous No.11658787]

You've heard of dolphin sex, but have you heard about dolphin threesomes?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-5rzzOZW1E

[Anonymous No.11658889]

>>11658722
>100W/kg specific power nuclear batteries
That's almost as exciting as the drive itself given its ability to refresh radioisotope supplies.

[Anonymous No.11658927]

>>11658787
There was an early shuttle concept where it was three identically-shaped delta-wing vehicles similar to that picture, but they were arranged in a triangle with the bellies in. Two of them were fuel tanks, one was the orbiter, and the tankers flew back after launch.
I saw it at Udvar-Hazy, as a little model on a shelf with other shuttle concepts, but I haven't been able to find it online anywhere.

[Anonymous No.11658941]

>>11658711

[Anonymous No.11658965]

>>11658941
>hyper advanced FFSCC methalox engine
>just throw it on that forklift thing with some straps bro it'll be fine

i love it

[Anonymous No.11658966]

>>11658965
Well, it just works.

[Anonymous No.11658972]

>>11658965
Reminder, entire Starship/Superheavy stack + all the Raptors + fuels will cost less than a single SLS engine.

[Anonymous No.11658980]

>>11658972
I am dubious of that claim
I do believe that it will cost less than all four SLS engines

[Anonymous No.11658990]

>>11658980
You think starship/superheavy stack will cost $600 million each?

[Anonymous No.11658995]

>>11658990
$150 million all up including one launch, with heat shield and all the plumbing and 37 raptors? That's less than they charge for an expendable Falcon Heavy launch.
the new RS-25 contract is for roughly $140 million per engine, if I remember correctly

[Anonymous No.11658997]

>>11658995
$145.8M per engine.

[Anonymous No.11659001]

>>11658997
I believe that it will cost roughly one SLS engine for a full-up Starship/Super Heavy stack on the pad from scratch
this is just pulling numbers out of my ass though

[Anonymous No.11659004]

>>11658990
no..it can't be....the engines can't cost 150 million dollars EACH?

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/01/nasa-defends-restart-rs-25-production/
" Six new RS-25s will compliment the existing stock of 16 engines, allowing the Space Launch System (SLS) to have enough engines through to her fifth flight."
"Under the deal – worth $1.16 billion – Aerojet Rocketdyne will modernize the engine to make it more affordable for SLS – previously tagged as the switch from the reusable RS-25D used on the Space Shuttle to the expendable RS-25E. The engine will be known only as the RS-25 during its SLS career."
193 million dollars per engine....it's WORSE.

[Anonymous No.11659006]

>>11659004
SLS engines are VERY expensive for absolutely no good reason other than that Aerojet Rocketdyne can charge that much

[Anonymous No.11659016]

>>11658995
>That's less than they charge for an expendable Falcon Heavy launch.
That's the point.
Also, even if you disregard Elon's goal of 200K per Raptor at full production and assume a pessimistic $1 million, you're at $37 million in engines. If we go with some further pessimistic guesswork and assume that the engines are ~30% of the total rocket cost, that puts build price at roughly $124 million, rounding up. If you take Elon's engine cost goal and apply the same estimation, you get a lower bound of $25 million. Kind of ridiculously cheap either way.

[Anonymous No.11659028]

>>11658995
I think 5 million per launch is doable within 5 years. But it'll take a lot of time for the market to catch up.

[Anonymous No.11659034]

>>11659016
there's a LOT of plumbing and shit that needs to go into the RCS systems, avionics, aerosurfaces, etcetera
that all adds up, and I think it might add up to a bit over one hundred million dollars
>>11659028
oh, absolutely
but I'm not talking about per launch, we're talking about turning raw materials into a single Starship/Super Heavy stack on the pad

[Anonymous No.11659035]

>>11659006
Proven human rating. That's years and money saved and why they don't want the specs fiddled with as well.
That's also why Rocketdyne can charge through the fucking ass while dragging their ass on building them.

[Anonymous No.11659043]

>>11658538
>obama getting locked up
what did i miss

[Anonymous No.11659044]

>>11659043
Wishful thinking, but Obama is looking a bit pale these days when he's putting out ads saying Trump has to go or the justice system is gone.

[Anonymous No.11659048]

>>11659035
>>11659006
what makes it really painful is they get dumped in the ocean and not reused...all that effort making a pretty high performance reusable rocket engine and it's dumped since it's hooked up to a bizarre, backwards design.

[Anonymous No.11659064]

>>11658593
thats a badass rocket

[Anonymous No.11659107]

>>11659064
it's too bad the soviets never got her into space.

[Anonymous No.11659150]

>>11658995
>That's less than they charge for an expendable Falcon Heavy launch
That's exactly the point. Elon said Starship will cost less than Falcon Heavy.

[Anonymous No.11659153]

>>11659150
That’s honestly hard to believe but this is Elon

[Anonymous No.11659154]

>>11659016
>If you take Elon's engine cost goal and apply the same estimation, you get a lower bound of $25 million
Geometric mean between 200K and 1 million is 447K not 25 Million.

[Anonymous No.11659163]

>>11659150
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1258580078218412033
Elon wants to get it to 1.5 million per launch, which I kinda doubt is possible (realistically the lowest it'll get is probably 3-5 million) but who knows.

[Anonymous No.11659167]

>>11659153
I actually buy it. They're trying to make the manufacturing process as simple and cheap as possible since they want to have swarms of these things going up within a decade or so.

[Anonymous No.11659172]

>>11659153
He said cost to operate Starship/SH is $2M or something like that. But lets ignore that for now and only count an expendable single launch vehicle. That will still only be under $150M total.

31(?) engines * $447K (geometric mean) = $13.8M (round up to $14M). Second stage Starship will use 6(?) engines * $447K ~= $2.7M or 3 million rounded up. Total engine cost is $17 million. Lets say Superheavy materials/labor to build cost $30M. Starship material/labor cost $20M. That will be under $70M total for vehicle itself. Then there might be insurance/license/fees/etc that adds another $10M-$20M per flight. So that's $90M. Also fuel cost will be rounded to $1M.

Full expendable Starship stack will cost ~$100M each.

[Anonymous No.11659173]

>>11659064
>thats a bad ass-rocket
Fixed

[Anonymous No.11659179]

>>11658147
How m*v^2 fits in?

[Anonymous No.11659205]

>>11658266
You'd need to set up counter-beam bit by bit. First a very small probe which declerates using magsails or something, then builds a small counter-beam, which you can use to send larger equipment.

[Anonymous No.11659285]

>>11658571
I thought they had a new launch site on some island so no more chink villages are getting stomped.

[Anonymous No.11659308]

>>11659043
It's BS, unfortunately. The fuss though is that he absolutely lied his ass off about the Flynn investigation, denying back in 2016 that he had any knowledge of the FBI investigation. Turns out records that the FBI were finally compelled to hand over indicated that not only did he know about it but had detailed knowledge of it and had meetings with the then-director of the FBI regarding it. It means the previous sitting president was involved in the almost surely illegal surveillance of an up-and-coming presidential candidate initiated by the FBI with the apparent intent to entrap one of that candidates staff into giving false testimony.

[Anonymous No.11659316]

>>11658780
noice

[Anonymous No.11659381]

>>11658392
>>11658460
Guys, how about nitrous oxide and propane but...
In separate tanks?

[Anonymous No.11659388]

>>11659381
what are you, a pussy?

WE GETTIN HANK HILL HIGH ON WHIPPETS BOOOOOOOOOOOIIIIIIIIII

[Anonymous No.11659393]

How does sticking fins on something make it more stable if the fins don’t have control surfaces?

[Anonymous No.11659403]

>>11659393
Drag

[Anonymous No.11659404]

>>11659393
Inherent aerodynamic stability has nothing to do with having control authority. Center of lift behind center of mass, rocket go straight.

[Anonymous No.11659427]

>>11659404
>Center of lift behind center of mass, rocket go straight.

Oh, okay. So that’s why rockets need huge wings of their own if they have a space plane sitting naked on top in KSP.

[Anonymous No.11659439]

>>11659427
Yes, if the spaceplane has wings those wings are acting like fins way up past the rocket's center of mass. Without more aerodyanmic surfaces in the rear or substantial authority control from vernier rockets this means that when in flight the whole thing will want to flip around backwards. It's why real rocket concepts with winged capsules will generally still contain them in a payload fairing.

[Anonymous No.11659467]

>>11658422
>>11658429
>NOOO YOU CAN'T JUST TRANSPORT DELICATE SPACE EQUIPMENT LIKE THAT AAAAAA

[Anonymous No.11659503]

>>11659439
That makes a lot of sense. I’m dumb lol
Might try sticking them onto the side like they did the space shuttle, but I hear controlling that is a bit difficult

[Anonymous No.11659505]

>>11659467
NOOOOO
YOU CAN'T PRICE ROCKET ENGINE FOR LESS THAN $148.5 MILLIONS
REEEEEEEEEEEE
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[Anonymous No.11659529]

>>11659503
If you can get procedural wings working it would probably also be worth it to design wings yourself that are the minimum size necessary for your spaceplane to perform it's functions. In addition Mechjeb (PBUH) can fly vehicles that hand-control struggles with, in the same way modern avionics has to do a lot of up-front work to keep fighters in the air or a Falcon rocket flying true, there are things that are physically possible but only workable with the precision flying of a computer.

[Anonymous No.11659532]

>>11659381
How would one build a rocket engine that uses these and won’t explode?

[Anonymous No.11659545]

>>11659308
So will every sitting president just mess with the next election now? If this were true, two in a row got away with it without any issues.

[Anonymous No.11659548]

>>11658253
It is like the opposite of globalism. Literally no longer confined to one globe. Sounds great.

[Anonymous No.11659560]

>>11659172
>Lets say Superheavy materials/labor to build cost $30M. Starship material/labor cost $20M.
what the are these asspull numbers. you have no idea what youre talking about

[Anonymous No.11659567]

/SFG/ ARE YOU READY FOR SLS LAUNCH!!!!1?1???$2 Soon™

[Anonymous No.11659577]

>>11659560
>whines vaguely

[Anonymous No.11659664]

Would you buy this?

[Anonymous No.11659665]

>>11658301
Well, how do you overcome diffraction??

[Anonymous No.11659669]

>>11659664
Only if I don't have to throw it away after assembling it

[Anonymous No.11659672]

>>11659664
Looks like something that would be fun to assemble with my son when he no longer poops himself

[Anonymous No.11659677]

>>11658134
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msiLWxDayuA

[Anonymous No.11659678]

>>11659664
No, i wish the tiny LEM from the Saturn V set was available seperately tho.

[Anonymous No.11659682]

>>11659545
It does concern me, and unfortunately it is at least partially relevant to spaceflight as more and more fields of society get sucked ever further into overt political power games. On the other hand you could hardly say that the DNC's election meddling has been without consequences, quite the contrary it's done permanent damage to the reputation and organization of their party, major backers like the Saudis have substantially reduced support for them, Trump used the peak collusion hysteria to quietly sever their ability to farm money from labor unions which made up the majority of their revenue, and their willing adoption of commie radicals is now threatening to split the party into two impotent blocs.

[Anonymous No.11659687]

>>11658422
>>11658429
>here's your most advanced rocket engine bro

[Anonymous No.11659706]

>>11659682
>Trump used the peak collusion hysteria to quietly sever their ability to farm money from labor unions which made up the majority of their revenue

Really? Can I have a source?

[Anonymous No.11659710]

>>11658422
the insurance must be insane on that thing

[Anonymous No.11659728]

>>11659710
What insurance? It's a prototype that they make for a couple of million.

[Anonymous No.11659732]

Exit scam haha

[Anonymous No.11659738]

>>11659577
Realistically we can't expect the cost of a "starship" to be under a billion dollars.

[Anonymous No.11659746]

>>11659732
What are our odds of Virgin Galactic/Orbital surviving the decade??

[Anonymous No.11659756]

>>11659738
>Realistically we can't expect the cost of a "starship" to be under a billion dollars.

Do show your calculations.

[Anonymous No.11659758]

>>11659738
If you're including all of the payload and life support for a trip to Mars maybe. For just the actual rocketry, that's a joke. Just try and come up with a reasonable way to reach that number when Raptor engines are already ~2m and coming down and the vehicle is constructed out of welded stainless. You doing some government accounting factoring in platinum toilets for budgetary management?

[Anonymous No.11659767]

>>11659706
I remember hearing about it a while back, when the impeachment shit was at crescendo, I'm having trouble finding anything concrete because searches are flooded with general screeching about "muh blumpft anti-worker reeeeee". I'll say that statement was only hearsay and I can't confirm it, I won't shit up the thread with any more politics either.
>>11659738
What's your reasoning? I do think the other Anon might be putting it pretty low, I ballparked the construction costs as being roughly equivalent to I think an expendable FH launch, $150M+, but I have no fucking clue where "under a billion" comes from.

[Anonymous No.11659769]

>>11659738
Yes, Grampa ULA, whatever you say.

*walks away*

[Anonymous No.11659801]

>>11659758
>If you're including all of the payload and life support for a trip to Mars maybe

What would make that so expensive? The Apollo suits were under a million dollars accounting for inflation. Really, I think there’d be more cost from the unmanned Starships which would land first carrying solar panels and methane refineries.

[Anonymous No.11659807]

>>11659738
Weak bait Boeing shill

[Anonymous No.11659811]

>>11659767
Not him, but $150m is under a billion.

[Anonymous No.11659823]

>>11659801
I don't know what specific components affect the cost the most, but we're talking a habitable area comparable to the entire ISS, which runs in the billions just to maintain. Of course, the ISS is a clunky hodgepodge, so that's only an upper bound. In any case solar panels and ISRU equipment shouldn't really be a significant factor next to that, running in the low millions.

[Anonymous No.11659845]

Starship SN6 as of this time

[Anonymous No.11659846]

>>11659823
Why in the fuck would you compare anything to the ISS? The ISS is a madman's PCP fueled fever dream of a space station.

[Anonymous No.11659850]

>>11659845
Damn, those welds looking sharp af now.

[Anonymous No.11659864]

>>11659846
The largest habitable volume SpaceX has designed is Dragon2, and it doesn't have to actually provide a sustained long duration livable environment. Until they get to that phase of development with Starship crew all I can do is use existing but pessimistic numbers.

[Anonymous No.11659869]

>>11659845
>Welds

[Anonymous No.11659871]

I'm interested in space and rocketry and I want to learn more about this subject. Do you know any sites or books, that would be helpful to me.

[Anonymous No.11659872]

>>11659864
I'm not going to suck off SpaceX and claim they will somehow get Starship's habitat cost down to suburban house levels or anything, but comparing a vehicle designed from the ground up to be inexpensive to build and operate to literally the most expensive piece of space hardware in human history is fucking retarded my man.

[Anonymous No.11659892]

>>11659872
I have no idea how much they will cut costs. I have no idea how much of this they will develop in-house or source from existing alternatives. Do I think it will compare favorably, obviously, I literally said the ISS is a clunky hodgepodge which only provides an upper bound on cost. But given that SpaceX does not even have its foot in the door on the matter, it's impossible to say if they can drop costs by one, two, or however many orders of magnitude.

[Anonymous No.11659899]

>>11659823
>I don't know what specific components affect the cost the most, but we're talking a habitable area comparable to the entire ISS, which runs in the billions just to maintain. Of course, the ISS is a clunky hodgepodge, so that's only an upper bound.

Yes, the ISS is a mess and, importantly, managed by the gubmint. I’ll do some napkin calculations.

The approximate travel time to Mars or back is six months.
The time between launch windows is 26 months, so if they leave on the first available launch window, they’d spend six months traveling to Mars, fourteen months on Mars, then six months traveling back. Let’s assume twenty astronauts travel to Mars, and I’ll be luxurious and assume they’re eating MREs. Freeze-dried foods would be much lighter in weight.
US army soldiers, if subsisting on MREs, eat three of them a day, so twenty people would eat a total of sixty MREs per day. Therefore during those 26 months (assuming each is 31 days) the astronauts would eat 48,360 MREs. Let’s assume these MREs are the heavier sort at 740 grams, so that’s 35,786,400 grams, or 35.8 tons. This weight would likely be much lighter in practice because stoves wouldn’t be needed. At $7.25 (it’s actually less expensive for non-government purchasers) the cost of all of this food would be a whopping $350,610 dollars. Big bucks to most people but negligible in this context, so food surely is not a significant part of the cost.

[Anonymous No.11659904]

>>11659871
Get Audible. Listen to Mike Collins Carrying the Fire and Space 2.0.

The The History ot Space Stations.

[Anonymous No.11659905]

>>11659746
>What are our odds of Virgin Galactic/Orbital surviving the decade??
I think they have a shot but the odds are stacked against them.

Virgin Galactic? They're in a tough position. Even if they successfully transform to an aerospace liner like they want to, Starship E2E may put them out of business. At the same time though, Starship E2E may not be feasible for large parts of the world (noise, Chinese spying, lack of launch opportunities), so Virgin Galactic might find it's niche there.

Virgin Orbital? I think it has an okay chance of surviving since their launch design is extremely flexible (basically take off from any decent size airport). They've already got a number of launch sites around the world lined up. Who knows how long will they be able to survive against Starship though.

[Anonymous No.11659921]

>>11659871
Unironically start by playing Kerbal Space Program. It's entry level and easy to get into but you'll get a practical feel for the basics.

[Anonymous No.11659923]

>>11659669

[Anonymous No.11659934]

We're going to leave the planet soon, but how long until we leave the Solar System? You think we'll be stuck here for hundreds of years? Thousands?

[Anonymous No.11659935]

>>11659664
>elon puts this on mars
One can dream.

[Anonymous No.11659940]

Latest Berger puff piece https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/05/a-2024-moon-landing-may-sound-crazy-but-nasa-is-giving-its-best-shot/

[Anonymous No.11659941]

>>11659934
Couple centuries. Eventually the aliens will reveal themselves and gift us warp drive.

[Anonymous No.11659950]

>>11659941
We'll get more than just a warp drive.

[Anonymous No.11659954]

>>11658722
You don't get any energy density benefit over a normal fusion system, because you'e making the antimatter in-situ. That being said, a fusion drive alone is a major breakthrough in propulsion technology, so it's not like this would be useless or anything, supposing they actually get it to work of course.

[Anonymous No.11659968]

>>11659665
The claim is that the particle beam acts as a waveguide and the laser keeps the particle beam contained.

[Anonymous No.11659969]

>>11659899
Correction: Transit to Mars is 6-9 months, but this doesn’t change the time spent on the Mars mission overall, it just reduces time spent on the surface.

[Anonymous No.11659975]

>>11659545
>two in a row
No, just Obama.

>>11659706
Supreme Court ruling banned mandatory dues payment for non members in workplaces with public sector unions. Teacher's unions have been a major source of Democrat funding for decades and now people can just opt out of membership.

[Anonymous No.11659977]

>>11659950

[Anonymous No.11659980]

>>11658698
He's not in a government.. oh, you were talking about the other 48 years old who acts juvenile.

[Anonymous No.11659987]

>>11659532
https://tfaws.nasa.gov/TFAWS06/Proceedings/Aerothermal-Propulsion/Papers/TFAWS06-1026_Paper_Herdy.pdf
Found one
>>11659548
>Martian romans have to fight Norman’s led by space Joshua Graham
Nice

[Anonymous No.11659994]

>>11659987
Normans? Time travel confirmed.

[Anonymous No.11660004]

>>11659548
I am fond of environmental protection, but the "WE ONLY HAVE ONE GLOBE" kind of annoys me. We need to settle more rocks.

[Anonymous No.11660005]

>>11659664
Only if the orange bricks were made in Louisiana, the white bricks in Utah, the grey and black bricks in California, and the stickers in Florida. We need to think about sustainable jobs in the space-themed Lego industry.

[Anonymous No.11660007]

>>11660004
Environmentalism is a religion. Nature is just some cool stuff to look at sometimes.

[Anonymous No.11660028]

>FUCK ELON MUSK
>WHAT'RE YOU GONNA DO, ORBITALLY BOMBARD ME?

[Anonymous No.11660031]

>>11659987
Note that the propellants are stored separately and mixed inside the combustion chamber, not stored together as a high explosive liquid

[Anonymous No.11660033]

>>11659934
If we colonize Mars in a decade, we may colonize the solar system in few hundred years. 500 years, from then, there might be enough manufacturing/population in space to push forward to another system.

[Anonymous No.11660076]

>>11659934
Frankly, no need to.
What do you think to find in another solar system?
Ours is already abundant of pretty much anything.

[Anonymous No.11660079]

>>11660076
>What do you think to find in another solar system?

Exploration and adventure.

[Anonymous No.11660082]

>>11660033
What matters is how long it takes to get a complex industrial base set up on some other low gravity world, be it Moon or Mars or asteroid (though due to the abundance of certain resources plus some bonus deals that come along with the package, Mars is likely to be the best option).

Once you have a colony that has been built up enough that it can handle all its own resource extraction and production needs, and can start building its own launch vehicles (lower barrier to entry on low gravity worlds, mind you), that's when the colonization of the solar system suddenly accelerates into high gear. It's like the difference between british colonies setting up shop on the east coast, to those same colonies simply growing and expanding to the west, where every town along the way is analogous to a newly colonized world in space.

We don't need the entire solar system to be developed in order to unlock interstellar flights, either. In fact all we need is to colonize Mars and develop fusion propulsion systems. Mars has a shitload of volatiles as well as elements like phosphorous which are vital to supporting life, which will be extremely important for stocking a star colony fleet. Mars also has not one but two asteroidal moons in perfectly circular equatorial orbits for us to mine and refine the metals we need to build those star colony fleets, as well. Finally, the water on Mars is enriched in deuterium compared to Earth's water, which means easier extraction of fusion engine fuel compared to any other known object in the solar system. Mars is so ideal for colonization in order for us to make the leap all the way to interstellar species that if someone had come up with it in a book rather than it being real I'd roll my eyes.

[Anonymous No.11660089]

>>11660079
Explore this. It's what you're going to find ayway.

[Anonymous No.11660095]

>>11660089
>Explore this. It's what you're going to find ayway.

Every world is unique.

[Anonymous No.11660107]

>>11660089
What are you, a computer?

You remind me of that mathematician who was acting all snotty about the Pluto flyby images and data because it wasn't anything 'fundamental'. Fuck man, I'd love to run into that guy on a subway or something and point out the fact that he's made zero contribution to his field so far and will be completely forgotten within a year of his death. FUCK that guy.

[Anonymous No.11660110]

>>11660089
You know there's more to explore than a highly focused field of science, right?

>>11660107
What's his name? He sounds like a prick who can't accept that everything about our world was derived empirically.

[Anonymous No.11660119]

[Anonymous No.11660121]

>>11660095
Agreed. There are so many cool combinations of physical attributes that could exist, our solar system doesn't even scratch the surface.

Imagine a roughly Earth-sized planet with Mars-like gravity orbiting the equivalent of a dozen AU from its star, which has a Titan-like nitrogen rich atmosphere and an active cryo-geologic system underlying a methane hydrological cycle.

Hell, you don't even need to think about something that exotic. Imagine an Earth-sized rocky planet that has significantly more sulfur content than Earth; how does that change things? Imagine a Moon-sized rocky object orbiting a hot Jupiter; what does that look like? The list of things goes on and on.

[Anonymous No.11660125]

>>11660089
Every world we inhabit will have a different impact on the society (or societies) living there, independent overculture due to spatial/temporal isolation, and probably even a uniquely tailored ecosystem for ISRU or just for kicks. Even if every single thing you ever find is a 'dead rock' there will be more variety than just differently arranged collections of atoms.

[Anonymous No.11660126]

What does /sci/ think about the new rover Perseverance?
It's going to have cameras and microphones on landing so we'll finally see and hear a landing on Mars

[Anonymous No.11660128]

>>11660110
>What's his name? He sounds like a prick
He's literally the first guy to show up in this video, and he looks like a prick too, especially with his LAHGE BRI'ISH CHOMPA'S
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHeNLFGlWLA

[Anonymous No.11660134]

>>11660126
Did they decide to stick with aluminum wheels or have they made the correct decision to use steel/any other material with a fatigue limit?

[Anonymous No.11660138]

>>11660119
>use no water - Special Hazard
>Shock and Heat; May Detonate - reactivity
>Extreme Danger - health hazard
>below 100°F - Flash Point

huh?

[Anonymous No.11660139]

>>11660134
It seems the wheels will still be aluminum, just thicker and a different alloy

[Anonymous No.11660140]

>>11660126
It's literally Curiosity again, so I don't understand why it needs to be so expensive, but whatever, more rovers is better I guess

[Anonymous No.11660141]

>>11659172
double the cost of the upper stage for heat shield tiles and such, that would make me feel better

[Anonymous No.11660150]

>>11660126
It's Curiosity 2.0. It's a great rover but nothing groundbreaking on its own. Unless I'm missing something about its experiments? It better have prospecting tools for future ISRU though.

>>11660134
The wheels are still aluminum, but will be bigger and thicker.

[Anonymous No.11660152]

>>11660128
Bucktooth needs his face rearranged. Nothing to learn from Pluto? Pandering to the Americans? Make your own probe nigger, I'd love to see it.

[Anonymous No.11660153]

>>11660140
>>11660150
well the base is the same, but the scientific payload is completely different

[Anonymous No.11660154]

>>11660126
It’s really cool, but I honestly feel it will be the last automated mission to Mars of significance that isn’t specifically looking for ore deposits.

[Anonymous No.11660158]

>>11660031
So it's not a monopropellant, just using N2O instead of LOX as the oxidizer.

[Anonymous No.11660160]

>>11660141
Why? The entire Falcon 9 doesn't cost that much to build. That's their current vehicle which isn't optimized for cost reduction, uses expensive carbon fiber, expensive tooling, expensive manufacturing, etc. You think heatshields that will be bolted on Starship will cost more than F9?

[Anonymous No.11660164]

>>11660141
Any relevant numbers to put to it? The heatshield is tufroc or tufroc-derived, can't find any cost per area but it's universally cited as low cost.

[Anonymous No.11660165]

>>11660139

[Anonymous No.11660168]

>>11660141
You really think a half-layer of hexagnal thermal tiles will cost as much as 6 Raptors, the entire steel structure, and all the plumbing combined?

[Anonymous No.11660170]

>>11660126
I'm so tired of rover shit now.
Send 2 people to Mars and with the first shovel they stab into the ground, they'll have more done than all the rovers combined.

[Anonymous No.11660171]

>>11660152
Those pictures were huge. For anyone who wasn't old enough to remember the Neptune flyby in 1989 this is the very first time in their lives they've seen the first up close images of a new planet.
>inb4 "but it's a dwarf planet", Pluto and Charon are still cool
Even the basic coloration of Pluto was taken from the realm of science fiction to something we know for sure.

[Anonymous No.11660172]

>>11660126
>You will live to see some colonist doing donuts in this thing's footage

[Anonymous No.11660175]

>>11660152
it's classic br*tish cope

>>11660158
Yes, because two mixed chemicals which can react exothermically aren't a monopropellant anyway. They'd still be a bipropellant, just mixed in a horribly dangerous manner.

[Anonymous No.11660177]

>>11660170
>Send 2 people to Mars and with the first shovel they stab into the ground, they'll have more done than all the rovers combined.

Shoutout to NASA for failing to design a fucking drill properly.

[Anonymous No.11660183]

>>11660171
Pluto isn't a planet but that doesn't make it any less cool.

Regardless, Titan is cooler than Pluto and it isn't even a dwarf planet, 'merely' a moon. People who put emotional connotations to geologic definitions are silly.

[Anonymous No.11660186]

>>11660177
It's not just that, it's the fact that human hands are just way more fucking efficient than a drill. Hit a really hard rock? The drill might chip and get fucked up and that's all she wrote. Do that with a shovel and you work around it and you end up with a second sample to bring home.

[Anonymous No.11660189]

>>11660126
Needs more battlebots inspired elements, if we are gonna send this big slow sciencey rover out there I want it to at least have the muscle to break some rocks and shit so we don't have another sticky drill fiasco.

[Anonymous No.11660190]

>>11658713
Orion looks like it was designed by Orks.

[Anonymous No.11660191]

>>11660128
Oh shit, I loved that Our Universe book as a kid. Still have it now.

[Anonymous No.11660197]

>>11660177
>can't design a rocket
>can't design a drill
>thinks a lunar tollbooth will be a great place to stage a moon base
>takes nearly a decade to send a clone of a rover to Mars
>JWST

[Anonymous No.11660200]

>>11660186
that's not what efficiency means you dang ol bringus. What you're describing is dexterity and adaptability. These traits are more important than outright efficiency anyway, because they're what enable you to actually do anything.

Daily reminder that two astronauts digging a pit into the side of a small hill on Mars would tell us more than all surface probes ever have, combined.

[Anonymous No.11660217]

>>11660183
We need to colonize the saturnian system. Titan and Enceladus are fucking great.

[Anonymous No.11660220]

>>11660126
Needs mor dakka

[Anonymous No.11660226]

>>11660200
>Daily reminder that two astronauts digging a pit into the side of a small hill on Mars would tell us more than all surface probes ever have, combined.

Grandma and her garden spade BTFOs fifty trillion dollar rover, more at six

[Anonymous No.11660228]

>>11660190
>paint Orion red for speed
>paint nukes yellow for better explosions
>paint dispenser parts blue for luck

[Anonymous No.11660233]

>>11660217
Yes we do, but we can't do it from Earth, delta V requirements are too big. If we were using nuclear thermal engines and nuclear electric propulsion starting from Mars, we could do it. If we had fusion we could do everything too, but it isn't wise to bet on technology that doesn't exist yet. Besides, if you wait for better engines they will never be built, because you don't need better engines to keep doing what we're already doing. We need to colonize Moon and Mars so that there's enough incentive to improve technology that it overcomes resistance from old comfy companies that want to churn out the same shit forever.

[Anonymous No.11660242]

>>11660139
Jesus fucking Christ I thought they had decided to go with the titanium alloy so they wouldn't get ripped the fuck up by Martian rocks.

[Anonymous No.11660243]

>>11660233
Elon has said Starship can reach Saturn, although I think he meant launching from Mars and doing refueling in Mars orbit.

[Anonymous No.11660244]

>>11660197
>JWST
>FUCK
>MY
>PROGRAM
>UP

[Anonymous No.11660247]

>>11660228
Wouldn't Cerenkov radiation paint the shield blue anyways?

[Anonymous No.11660256]

>>11660242
They wouldn't even need to go with titanium alloy, literally just thin mild steel would work fine. The problem is that it would weigh 2 kg more in total so there's no way they'd even use it. Fuck, I cannot stand this "every gram at any cost" philosophy that has infected spaceflight.

[Anonymous No.11660260]

>>11660256
An unfortunate side effect of bad launcher design having infected spaceflight.

[Anonymous No.11660264]

>>11660243
It definitely cannot reach Saturn from Earth. Also, the reason I baseline NTP plus nuclear electric for manned flights to Saturn is to cut down transfer time; even with a Jupiter gravity assist along the way it takes like 6 years in deep space to get there.
6 months to get to Mars is fine. 72 months to get to Saturn is not fine.

[Anonymous No.11660277]

>>11660247
>Cerenkov radiation
Only occurs when massive particles are moving faster than the speed of light in a medium. Light slows down significantly in water for example, but neutrons do not, which is why as neutrons move through the water at close tot eh speed of light through vacuum, they actually move faster than the light moving through the water, and because quantum mechanics blue light is given off. IIRC it's because the light can't speed up, so it compresses in wavelength instead, so infrared light is being boosted to blue wavelengths or something.

[Anonymous No.11660280]

>>11660264
>6 months to get to Mars is fine. 72 months to get to Saturn is not fine.

It may be tolerable with future amenities, but we should really be focusing on Mars for the near future. Expeditions to the outer solar system can be launched from there.

[Anonymous No.11660281]

>>11660260
I'm definitely looking forward to "just throw more Starships at it lol" to get cheaper than engineering the perfect featherweight parts.

[Anonymous No.11660286]

>>11660256
>Fuck, I cannot stand this "every gram at any cost" philosophy that has infected spaceflight.
Same. There's also this notion that overbuilding in aerospace is somehow a sign of bad engineering. Like how some sneered that the Falcon 9 has to sacrifice half of its potential payload capacity so it can fly back to its launch site, while ignoring that it does this so it can be reusable.

[Anonymous No.11660291]

>>11660260
It's a combo of anemic launch capability and extreme aversion to risk making every single probe be a one-off with unique instruments etc. when the ideal would be mass produced probes yeeted at targets with standardized instruments in order to map out the same data set across a huge area. Doesn't matter if 5% fail when you send 100, you still have 95 successful missions. They're also much faster to build and cheaper, as well as cheaper per unit because you're making a lot of them. This way you can just roll new instruments into the total package over time rather than starting from scratch every eight years.

[Anonymous No.11660301]

>>11660291
That’s bad because that’s how a private entity would do it.

[Anonymous No.11660305]

>>11660291
But with that plan, then you can't farm grants to pay for the meals of the poor engineers.

[Anonymous No.11660312]

>>11660286
>Like how some sneered that the Falcon 9 has to sacrifice half of its potential payload capacity so it can fly back to its launch site, while ignoring that it does this so it can be reusable.
Thunderfoot lol
But yes, I agree. It wouldn't matter if a reusable launch vehicle needed to launch 5 times to match the payload capacity of an expendable vehicle, so long as you could launch it more than 5 times you're better off. Of course there's no real upper limit to how often you could reuse a rocket, depending on engineering. It's also obvious that a reusable rocket can be just as big or bigger than the biggest expendable rockets, so it's not like you're limited there. I swear if SpaceX weren't around to break the establishment, the majority of people's minds would still be poisoned by Shuttle on the subject of reusability.

[Anonymous No.11660314]

>>11660301
>private = bad
You bet it's bad, bad for academics who leech off of public organizations. Fuck those people.

[Anonymous No.11660320]

>>11660291
Faster?
CHEAPER?
That's sounding pretty unAmerican and too reusable for my taste. You won't get away with it if I have anything to say about it...
AND I DO, I'M GONNA SAY THE N WORD.

[Anonymous No.11660321]

>>11660305
Luckily those grant farmers are easy to drive to extinction. Literally takes one real competitor and they evaporate.

[Anonymous No.11660331]

>>11660320
Fuck you Shelby, I don't need your funding anyway. This goes beyond your capacity to cancel.

[Anonymous No.11660341]

>>11660320
Don’t make me say the D word!

[Anonymous No.11660360]

>>11659977
kek

[Anonymous No.11660370]

>>11660164
>>11660160
>>11660168
aerosurfaces and etcetera, conformal heat tiles are a pain in the butt, but it still puts it under Falcon Heavy

[Anonymous No.11660379]

What do you guys think of the rotating detonation wave engine? I'm seeing some claims that would be fairly extraordinary if true (~20% performance increase compared to conventional deflagration-powered rocket?), but nothing very concrete yet. Also these engines would apparently have a reduced thrust to weight ratio in exchange for that efficiency, which kinda sucks but isn't super relevant for travel once in orbit.

To put that into perspective, a methalox powered rotating detonation wave engine would get an efficiency of 456 in vacuum, if the 20% efficiency improvement is to be believed. The would mean we could combine the bulk density of methalox with the Isp of hydrolox, meaning we'd actually be able to achieve the improvements implied by meme hydrolox propellant.
85% propellant mass fraction would give you ~8.5 km/s of delta V, and since you don't need giant insulated tanks for holding hydrogen much of that remaining 15% mass can be payload instead of useless structure.

[Anonymous No.11660385]

>>11660126
damn nigga, NASA got asanti rims

[Anonymous No.11660390]

>>11660280
Around 1 year in deep space is the limit because of zero gravity and galactic cosmic ray radiation. If you want to go on multiyear missions to outer solar system, you need a rotating spacecraft with several tons (~meters) per square meter of shielding. You cannot just yeet a Starship at Saturn.

[Anonymous No.11660395]

>>11660370
>conformal heat tiles are a pain in the butt
Because of Starship's shape nearly all of the tiles will be identical, so I don't think they'll cost nearly as much to produce as Shuttle's tiles. Also they're physically bolted onto Starship via three metal posts instead of being glued with high temp silicon to a foam pad which is also itself glued to the skin, like Shuttle. Should be simple to install and replace as necessary; some mexican welders managed to manhandle and install over 14 of the things onto SN4 without breaking them.

[Anonymous No.11660404]

>>11660390
> Around 1 year in deep space is the limit because of zero gravity and galactic cosmic ray radiation.

Evolve. Adapt. Overcome.

[Anonymous No.11660406]

>>11660370
No way will heatshields cost more than $1m total. Its a piece of ceramics/tufroc bolted on. There's no expensive labor or tooling necessary. There's no expensive time consuming process. Its just that simple.

[Anonymous No.11660407]

>>11660390
You need a rotating habitat, yes, but you only need two Starships attached by the nose via tether to accomplish that. Cosmic ray dose doesn't really matter unless you're getting blasted for multiple years, and solar ejections are dangerous but can be shielded via a storm shelter of food and water that everyone packs into when the alarm goes off. The trick to accomplishing Saturn transport will be a combination of improved propulsion lowering coasting period duration and improved power supplies to support power-hungry vehicles too far from the Sun for solar to be viable.

[Anonymous No.11660431]

This post was brought to you by Brilliant.

[Anonymous No.11660436]

>>11660407
Coriolis effect is gonna be a fucking bitch on that merry-go-round of yours. You're gonna need something bigger than that if you want to avoid a literal fucking vomit comet.

[Anonymous No.11660448]

>>11660436
You can just make the tether longer.

[Anonymous No.11660449]

>>11660436
>attached by the nose via TETHER
In your defense I did forget to mention the tether would be 1.5 km long. There wouldn't be any weird rotating-reference-frame effects, at least none that could be noticed.

[Anonymous No.11660450]

>>11660448
>>11660449
Nobody's ever gonna go for that Kerbal solution of yours.

[Anonymous No.11660453]

>>11660450
Give one reason why it wouldn't work.

[Anonymous No.11660456]

>>11660449
SpaceX would need to spend billions making a tether that's thin, lightweight, stronger than any material known to mankind, cheap to produce. Its not gonna happen. Soon as you fix the tether issue, you get space elevator.

[Anonymous No.11660461]

>>11660453
For starters, it's fucking dumb. 1.5km long tether and you're going to balance spin two ships connected with a glorified thread. Brilliant fucking plan.
A torus would be a far more elegant solution and that was already suggested 70 odd years ago by someone far smarter than anyone in these threads.

[Anonymous No.11660466]

>>11660456
I think you're vastly overestimating the strength it would need to have—it's well within modern materials. That being said, it is a very scary point of failure if they do actually do it.

[Anonymous No.11660467]

>>11660390
>Around 1 year in deep space is the limit because of zero gravity
Astronauts are coming back from the ISS now with negligible bone loss because of the new exercise machine/regimen

[Anonymous No.11660470]

>>11660449
Since someone went to the trouble of making this image. I believe it.

[Anonymous No.11660472]

>>11660461
Musk isn't afraid to do dumb things if it's cheap and effective

[Anonymous No.11660480]

>>11660456
A 1.5km tether would be hard to build, but it isn't anywhere near space elevator tier.

[Anonymous No.11660487]

>starship
>space launch system
Why are those names so fucking basic and lame? I mean Falcon9 sounds cool, and Big Falcon Rocket was a better name. Why /sci/?

[Anonymous No.11660497]

>>11660487
Starship is a cool name.

[Anonymous No.11660499]

>>11660487
>starship
>starliner
>SpaceShipTwo
yeah, I don't really know why they all have terrible names

[Anonymous No.11660505]

>>11658428
>this is how a politician talks online
fuck yanks

[Anonymous No.11660506]

>>11658205

Wars between nuclear powers won't happen until some new magical weapon makes nukes not the ultimate "I win" button.

[Anonymous No.11660507]

>>11660456
No. The force necessary to lift Starship onto the launch pad on Earth via a crane is equal to the force required to hold two Starships together when spinning at a high enough rpm to simulate 1 G. Therefore you need a tether that is as strong as the cable arrangement you used to stack Starship onto Super Heavy.

For example, pic related is a crane that can lift about ten times the mass that a Starship would have once in orbit on an interplanetary trajectory. Note the thickness and number of the cables. I count 16, which can safely hold 3200 tons up in that block-and-tackle arrangement. If we imagine the cables terminated at the hook instead of wrapping around pulleys, there's actually be 32 of them. Therefore to tether two Starship's together, you need just four of those steel cables, or a single cable with equal cross-sectional area.

Of course they probably wouldn't use a steel cable to do this, instead they'd use kevlar, since it's significantly stronger than steel for its mass and is already space-rated. A set of four kevlar cables would be noticeably thicker than four steel cables, but would have less than half the mass.

>Soon as you fix the tether issue, you get space elevator

lmao, no. I see the oldspace meme has taken hold of you; it doesn't fucking MATTER how much the tether system weighs. It could require the entire payload capacity of one of the two Starships, and it wouldn't matter, because it would enable spin-gravity for long term space flight missions, and that's more valuable than preserving payload capacity while sacrificing the ability to even do the fucking mission.

[Anonymous No.11660514]

>>11660487
Starship is a cool name. It's saying "This machine gets us to other planets. No more fucking around in Earth or Lunar orbit."

[Anonymous No.11660516]

>>11660514
Also individual starships will have names, so it's not like they're all called "starship"

[Anonymous No.11660517]

>>11660487
>>11660497
>>11660499
>Motherfucking SATURN V
I mean, how cool is that?
Hell, they could literally name new rocket Von Braun and it still be a better name than space launch system.

[Anonymous No.11660518]

>>11660516
They'll all be "Starship SNwhatever".

[Anonymous No.11660519]

>>11660461
You don't need to balance anything, the masses could be offset by 10% and you wouldn't notice the difference, except one Starship would have somewhat more artificial G than the other. Oh fucking well. The point of rotation along the tether would simply shift towards the heavier Starship a bit.
>glorified thread
6 inch thick kevlar rope. Alternatively, a dozen one-inch thick ropes for redundancy.

>torus
>NOOOO! YOU CAN'T JUST DO SPIN GRAVITY! YOU NEED TO LAUNCH A MILLION TONS OF BUILDING MATERIALERINO! AAAAAAAAAA!!
>haha spaceships go wheeee

In all seriousness though, you just refuted the idea that a magical superstrong material needs to be used for a space tether connecting two objects rotating at 1 G, because if that were true, then a torus would require the exact same fucking materials. What is a rotating torus but a continuous series of tethered spacecraft welded together? The hoop stresses on a torus are just as large as the tension forces in a tether arrangement; if steel's strength to mass ratio works for a rotating torus, it works for a tether arrangement.

[Anonymous No.11660523]

>>11660506
Redirected long-period comet says hello

[Anonymous No.11660524]

>>11660516
They should stick with Falcon nomenclature.

[Anonymous No.11660527]

>>11660518
>>11660524
starship is a vessel, not a rocket
vessels need real names, especially if they're being produced in the quantity that they intend on

[Anonymous No.11660545]

>>11660527
S.X.S. Boca Chica
SpaceX Ship seems like a good ship prefix for starship.

[Anonymous No.11660572]

>>11660545
>>11660527
>>11660524
>>11660518
Pic related is the only correct answer

[Anonymous No.11660575]

>>11660506
Political motivation to keep nukes as the "'I win' button" is the only reason they haven't been rendered irrelevant by active defense. It ain't magic at all

>>11660523
>Redirects your redirected comet

[Anonymous No.11660582]

>>11660449
I unironically think this will be rendered obsolete soon by ships that can accelerate at 1 g for days at a time.

[Anonymous No.11660583]

>>11660516
He's probably gonna name them all from the Culture novels like the autist he is.

[Anonymous No.11660584]

>>11660527
Elon doesn't like names because planes don't have them. Which is silly imo, ships have names, why not starships? I think it just leads credence to the idea of their permanence compared to previous rockets.

[Anonymous No.11660594]

>>11660584
yeah, if he intends to make people live in one for almost a year, it better have a cool, unique name

[Anonymous No.11660607]

>>11660575
>>Redirects your redirected comet
Good luck redirecting a 5 billion ton object with 6 months of warning time, also it only cost me the resources necessary to give that comet a few cm/s of delta V whereas you're going to give it a few meters per second. Oh, and I could always go full Armageddon on your ass and pack that comet nucleus with nukes, shotgunning it apart into a debris cloud when you try to get close.

[Anonymous No.11660608]

The SS (SpaceX Starship):
Heart of Gold
Ex Luce Stellarum
Dawnbreaker
Curie
Goddard
Patience
Quicksilver

[Anonymous No.11660612]

>>11660582
>1g continuous acceleration, ever
Real life isn't the expanse, dude. The specific impulse required to do 1g flights that last weeks would vastly exceed the propellant energy density afforded by fusion and even pure antimatter-matter reactions.

[Anonymous No.11660614]

>>11660608
SS is already used, technically SpaceX stands for Space eXploration (technologies). So SXS is the logical choice.

[Anonymous No.11660615]

>>11660608
Big Nigger

[Anonymous No.11660617]

>>11660608
https://theculture.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_spacecraft_in_the_Culture_series

Take your pick.

[Anonymous No.11660624]

>>11660614
Just call it SEX. It’s a giant cock already

[Anonymous No.11660626]

>>11660612
Plus there's that little matter of lightspeed. Accelerating at 1g for 75 days gets you 0.2c. IIRC even the Expanse handwaved the Epstein drive as being something like a thousand times more fuel efficient than a regular fusion torch.

[Anonymous No.11660629]

>>11660612
>Real life isn't the expanse, dude

Aliens can accelerate at over 50 gs but I dunno how long they can sustain it

[Anonymous No.11660641]

>>11660507
Starship gross weight is ~1300 mT. Kevlar thickness needed to support 2 of those would require around 2.5 feet or 0.75 meter thick diameter. Making that 1.5km requires monumental challenge with current tech/production capabilities in cost/manufacturing/deployment/etc. The longest we have of kevlar is 2.5 inch thick stretching 3 miles in US military test site. I can't find cost of material so, if you have any price figures, tell me.

[Anonymous No.11660655]

>>11660629
Aliens don't real, but even if they did they wouldn't be able to sustain ~1g for weeks, because matter itself only contains so much energy, even if you can convert mass to energy in the form of thrust at 100% efficiency.

[Anonymous No.11660664]

>>11660655
>Aliens don't real

Maybe, maybe not, but someone is flying around with super tech craft.

[Anonymous No.11660673]

Why can't we just do repeated gravity slingshot maneuvers to get spacecraft up to desired velocity?

[Anonymous No.11660677]

>>11660664
"unexplained aerial phenomena"

[Anonymous No.11660690]

>>11660673
That takes a long ass time.

[Anonymous No.11660701]

>>11658422
>>11658429
KINO

[Anonymous No.11660702]

>>11660641
>Starship gross weight is ~1300 mT.
It won't weigh 1300 tons on transit to anywhere because it will burn off 1200 tons of propellant mass to accelerate. Also Starship is currently slated to have 1300 tons of propellant and carry 150 tons of payload in a ~100 ton vehicle, so a gross mass of 1550 tons and a dry mass with payload and landing propellant of ~300 tons.

>Kevlar thickness needed to support 2 of those
You only need to support the weight-force of one, because they're pulling on each other. A crane cable doesn't need to withstand 10 tons of force to lift a 5 ton object, even though the crane is pulling with 5 tons of force and the object is pulling with 5 tons of force. In the case of two Starships the force the tether experiences is actually half of the total weight force of the mass of both starships combined.

>The longest we have of kevlar is 2.5 inch thick stretching 3 miles
So use a bundle of those. No need to reinvent the wheel.

Your basic understanding of the problem is flawed and you should feel bad.

[Anonymous No.11660704]

>>11660690
How about we build the spin launch system in space then!? Wouldn't be gravity assist, but we could yeet smaller sats and probes all over this system.
Hmm. or maybe on the moon it would work better.

[Anonymous No.11660713]

>>11660702
>A crane cable doesn't need to withstand 10 tons of force to lift a 5 ton object
also the spin probably wouldn't be for 1G, but 1/3G to acclimate them to Mars gravity

[Anonymous No.11660718]

>>11660677
Yeah yeah yeah its swamp gas that is energized by a reaction between the steel in aircraft carriers and Venusian infrared tachyons that appears in groups on radar in the exosphere and can be seen with the naked eye.

[Anonymous No.11660724]

>>11660718
it's almost like it's up for interpretation

[Anonymous No.11660729]

>>11660724
Yeah, maybe it’s swamp gas mirages that happen to behave exactly like manned craft. Who knows?

[Anonymous No.11660738]

>>11658392
>>11658561
I made the team logo.

[Anonymous No.11660743]

>kilometer long tethers

Tip-to-tip (preferably) or tail to tail (more structurally sound).

High rotation rate for whatever it is gravity you want and crew training which will be mandatory because all of you faggots will vomit your guts out in micro gravity anyway so the argument is moot, or low rotation rate for minimal gravity to make basic things like showering, cleaning, and bodily functions actually work properly.

Low gravity is my preferred option. If high gravity is needed you'll be going to Saturn or beyond anyway and you won't be doing it with 9m starships.

[Anonymous No.11660747]

>>11660743
Tip to tip avoids "ha ha fuck you the floor and the ceiling just switched" fun times.

[Anonymous No.11660751]

>>11660702
Still stupid idea regardless.

[Anonymous No.11660761]

>>11660607
Turning a hit into a near miss will always be easier than redirecting the comet in the first place. And the amount of warning you give off starts with your first maneuver, good luck retard.

[Anonymous No.11660769]

>>11660456
You can get 2in diameter steel wire rope with a breaking strength of ~200 tons, which weighs ~8 pounds per foot. Some conversions later and you end up with an ~18 metric ton cable made out of plain steel. That cable wouldn't be strong enough for full Earth gravity, but you can get bigger steel wire rope, and it puts the cable mass well within Starship's payload capabilities.

[Anonymous No.11660770]

>>11660738
Based.

[Anonymous No.11660802]

>>11660575
It's way harder to defend against missiles than you think. But lasers are improving fast and they may be the solution.

[Anonymous No.11660812]

>>11660673
Gravity slingshots can only give you so much velocity each time, and he amount you get actually goes down the higher your encounter velocity (because you spend less time in that object's sphere of influence). At significant interstellar speeds (0.5% of light speed for example, 1500 km/s) you'd be getting effectively no gravity assist at all, even approaching a big planet like Jupiter.

[Anonymous No.11660813]

Aw shit Elon’s going to jail

[Anonymous No.11660816]

>>11660743
>Noo you can't just adjust to microgravity
Can and will, at least for trips as far as Mars. Out beyond you'll need a different solution, but if you're going past Mars you probably shouldn't be using chemical fueled rockets designed to land on Earth, it just leaves too much on the table compared to an orbit-to-orbit nuclear engine.

[Anonymous No.11660819]

>>11660813
Give source or GTFO.

[Anonymous No.11660820]

>>11659664
>he doesn't have the Saturn V

[Anonymous No.11660823]

>>11660751
>literally doesn't have an argument, just doesn't like it

People who have the power to make actual decisions don't care about your opinions

[Anonymous No.11660828]

>>11660813
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1259945593805221891

he's going NUCLEAR

[Anonymous No.11660832]

>>11660738
>dud nazi shit lmao
kill yourself

[Anonymous No.11660836]

>>11660828
What a fucking idiot he's been these past weeks

[Anonymous No.11660839]

>>11660761
>turning a hit into a near miss will always be easier
Not if you're redirecting a long period comet out in the Kuiper belt, retard. Tiny delta V that far out changes the periapsis altitude by millions of kilometers. Doesn't need to be a big maneuver to go from skimming Mars' orbit to slamming into Earth on the next inward leg.
>warning you give off starts with first maneuver
You won't see anything happening in the Kuiper belt, retard, especially not a maneuver that is performed by electromagnetically accelerating a million ton chunk of rock away from the comet nucleus, with the waste heat generated by the power plant being radiated on the side of the comet facing away from the inner solar system.

[Anonymous No.11660841]

>>11660819
Fremont factory is going back to production against Alameda County policy. They have the support of the governor though, so nothing's gonna happen.

[Anonymous No.11660852]

>>11660836
He's always been like this-deep down, Musk is that socially isolated little boy being thrown down the stairs, forever-resentful of being controlled, incredibly sensitive to what he perceives as insults.

I admire his ambition and recognize his greatness, but he's as flawed as they come.

[Anonymous No.11660853]

>>11660832
Complaining about 1940s Germans on 4chan in a spaceflight thread is particularly dumb.

[Anonymous No.11660855]

>>11660816
Orbit to orbit nuclear engine is less capable than orbit to surface chemical rocket that uses aerobraking. No reason to use orbit-to-orbit nuclear unless you have Isp in the hundreds of thousands of seconds. Otherwise it's always better to design fro aerobraking; in fact even with a >100,000 Isp engine it's be better to aerobrake, it's just that the beneficial returns become minimal at that point.

[Anonymous No.11660856]

>>11660828
>This timeline

[Anonymous No.11660862]

>>11660820
>yellow LEDs on 2nd and third stage
bruh, gimme the blue shit

>>11660828
can he get any more based

[Anonymous No.11660864]

>>11660839
Nice fanfiction faggot.

[Anonymous No.11660871]

>>11660828
mad lad

[Anonymous No.11660870]

>>11660855
You don't need a ship that's overbuilt for purpose to just aerobrake. A nuclear thermal or nuclear electric rocket would still have an aft-end full of shielding it could easily aerobrake with.

[Anonymous No.11660875]

>>11660841
>They have the support of the governor
That is all Elon needs, the county won't do shit.

[Anonymous No.11660880]

>>11660395
>>11660406
yeah, it won't be bad but there's still a lot of systems going on in Starship, it should cost at least as much as the Falcon 9 first stage

[Anonymous No.11660881]

Based Elon making basedbois enter an entire new dimension of SEETHING

[Anonymous No.11660883]

>>11660880
Didn’t Elon say that it would cost less than F9 per-unit?

[Anonymous No.11660886]

>>11660407
>the only communication between the two tethered starships are LAN parties

[Anonymous No.11660889]

>>11660886
>the inter-crew chat is just a Moonbase Alpha server
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1B488z1MmaA

[Anonymous No.11660907]

>>11660883
Yes.

[Anonymous No.11660909]

>>11660518
only the unmanned ones, if it has people on it gets a name
the Dear Moon starship will probably be named Dear Moon

[Anonymous No.11660911]

>>11660909
It will have a Japanese passenger so it might be named Type-Moon.

[Anonymous No.11660916]

>>11660853
What does your edgy nazi larping 1488 shit have to do with Von Braun?

[Anonymous No.11660922]

>>11660916
Mostly making retards like you mad.

[Anonymous No.11660931]

>>11660907
Starship&super heavy will be cheaper then a single falcon9 to produce?
Development cost not included i assume.
Is this because of the stainless steel meme?

[Anonymous No.11660935]

>>11660881
Acting like a child on twitter is so based am I right?

[Anonymous No.11660938]

>>11660922
epic

[Anonymous No.11660940]

>>11660931
It's because of the stainless steel, the Raptor, and the fact that they don't let the second stage burn up in the atmosphere every flight.

[Anonymous No.11660941]

>>11660852
Nothing flawed about that

[Anonymous No.11660949]

>>11660870
Shielding alone does not equal reentry thermal shielding. Engines don't actually have good thermal robustness either, they can only handle extreme internal temperatures because they are full of hollow channels through which flow cryogenic liquid propellants. You really don't want to enter ass-first into any atmosphere while moving faster than 1 km/s, and even that's pushing it.

[Anonymous No.11660955]

>>11660828
he's going all in

[Anonymous No.11660958]

>>11660935
>ignoring an authoritarian pozzed county's rules is "Acting like a child on twitter"
Extremely based you little bitch.

[Anonymous No.11660969]

>>11660931
Yes, stainless steel is in a whole different universe when it comes to ease of manufacturing. Falcon 9 needs to use friction stir welding because its aluminum-lithium alloy tanks are highly reactive at elevated temperatures; this greatly limits the design space they can use, because friction stir welding is pretty much the opposite of a flexible and adaptable manufacturing technique. Al-Li alloy is also very expensive compared to stainless steel.

They're also iterating Starship's design so much not just for dumb performance as so many anons assume, but because they are trying to make the design as easy and cheap and fast to build as possible, without sacrificing performance. They're effectively out there working out the anti-SLS rocket.

[Anonymous No.11660974]

>>11660958
this

pretty sure >>11660935 is a shill, if not they're retarded. That politician who tweeted 'fuck Elon Musk' is the real child.

[Anonymous No.11660976]

>>11660958
Amazing how many buzzwords you can fit into a sentence

[Anonymous No.11660990]

>NOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CANT REOPEN YOUR FACTORY THAT'S LITERALLY ILLEGAL
>WHAT IF YOUR EMPLOYEES CATCH A SLIGHTLY WORSE VARIANT OF THE FLU OMG THIS IS SO IRRESPONSIBLE
>F*CK ELON

[Anonymous No.11660991]

>>11660974
What is the purpose of threatening to move manufacturing plant and the Tesla HQ over the covid restrictions?

[Anonymous No.11660992]

>>11660976
>no argument
Concession accepted.

[Anonymous No.11660995]

>>11660991
he's been getting dicked over by California for a while
I have no evidence for this other than the fact that it's California

[Anonymous No.11660996]

>>11660991
No longer giving tax revenue to a government you do not support.

[Anonymous No.11660999]

>>11660916
Reminder that without Hitler you would never have had a successful space program.

[Anonymous No.11661006]

>>11660996
If he's so adamant in resuming production why would he move an entire production line that would delay things for a year over waiting a few more weeks for the restrictions to lift?

[Anonymous No.11661011]

A naming convention tier list

>ELDER GOD TIER
>Mars Colonial Transporter

>GOD TIER
>interplanetary Transport System

>HIGH TIER
>Big Fucking Rocket

>CRINGE TIER
>Starship

[Anonymous No.11661012]

>>11660991
>factory exists to produce
>can't produce because of county rules that go even further than the state government let alone Federal
Oh I wonder you retard. Government officials telling Elon to go fuck himself is the cherry on top.

[Anonymous No.11661014]

>>11660990
Oh god, wait til she tries to flood south Texas with AIDS ridden califags to vote him out

[Anonymous No.11661016]

>>11661006
He's going to do both, resume production in the short term while building a new factory in the longer term.

[Anonymous No.11661029]

>>11661006
For a better environment in general. There's a reason why Tesla is the last car company in California.

This whole situation really ass blasts you huh?

[Anonymous No.11661035]

>>11661011
starship is pretty cool for a name when the rockets get individual mission names. if the ships mission name is Enterprise, then the thing can be called the Starship Enterprise. It's my head cannon that this is what Elon intended when he was forced to change the name.

[Anonymous No.11661050]

>>11661029
He's unnecessarily making an ass out of himself over this. He needs more finesse.

[Anonymous No.11661057]

>>11659677
Would love to go to Titan one day.

[Anonymous No.11661072]

>>11660836
Cry more commie fascist piece of shit

[Anonymous No.11661076]

>>11660852
Elon Musk has no flaws. He is divine.

[Anonymous No.11661084]

>>11659738
I'll screencap this and bring it back up when starship is launching for 5 million per launch at under 200 million per vehicle.

[Anonymous No.11661092]

>>11660456
Zylon exists already

[Anonymous No.11661093]

>>11661011
Should've been Thunderbird

[Anonymous No.11661095]

>>11659969
Transit to mars is 3-6 months, not 6-9 months.

[Anonymous No.11661096]

>>11661050
>Noooo you’re making Stalinist basedboys cry

[Anonymous No.11661100]

>>11659934
150-200 years for the first manned missions outside the solar system (these will likely be generation ships), 200-400 for the first "fast" interstellar journeys (upwards of 0.2c)

[Anonymous No.11661105]

>>11661011
Would it be too cringe to call the moon version of starship moonraker?

[Anonymous No.11661107]

>>11661105
Lunar schooner.

[Anonymous No.11661115]

>>11661107
The Bang Zoom.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98qw86DsdZ0

[Anonymous No.11661125]

>>11661011
>Starship
>SS
>SS von Braun

[Anonymous No.11661127]

>>11661115
>Seleneship

[Anonymous No.11661129]

if elon is thrown in the clink then who runs spacex?

[Anonymous No.11661133]

>>11661129
he has VPs for everything, and the important stuff can be called in

[Anonymous No.11661135]

>>11661129
Gwynne Shotwell.

[Anonymous No.11661138]

>>11661129
Senator Shelby.

[Anonymous No.11661143]

>do some reading about the Conestoga and other ICBM derived rockets
>turns out you need four or five stages to orbit a decent payload with solid rockets
>all those dead engines in the water
Suddenly NASA's obsession with the Shuttle and other SSTO-ish things makes a lot more sense.

[Anonymous No.11661157]

>>11661138
no.

[Anonymous No.11661158]

>>11661127
The mooner.

[Anonymous No.11661168]

is it safe to say that we'll get a 150m hop this week?

[Anonymous No.11661182]

>Der Spiegel hit piece
>IS ELON MUSK SELLING HIS HOUSES CAUSE HE‘S BROKE OR IS IT MADNESS??
Christ. I swear German papers hate him more than American ones.

[Anonymous No.11661188]

>>11661182
well he's murdering Audi, Volkswagen, Mercedes and BMW attempts at luxury electric vehicles

[Anonymous No.11661192]

>>11661182
Germans are all 90 years old and have no kids.

[Anonymous No.11661198]

>>11661168
Seems likely

[Anonymous No.11661199]

>>11661092
Zyklon*

[Anonymous No.11661201]

>>11661168
Probably next week

[Anonymous No.11661227]

Long March crashed again.

[Anonymous No.11661233]

>>11661227
Ahahhaa

[Anonymous No.11661234]

>>11661227
That’s the center stage dude.

[Anonymous No.11661246]

>>11661227
>you could also count Space Shuttle Columbia
RIP

[Anonymous No.11661264]

>>11661129
He's not gonna. He'll be bailed out in an instant. Then sue the county for damage. This will go to supreme court and finally Elon will rake in billions from California's unlawful executive order that took away people's freedom.

This is Elon calling out liberal's biggest bluff. They'll fold as they have nothing to stand on. The whole "lets open supermarkets" but not Tesla is not based on science. They are claiming Musk is a "anti-science" now when their decision has nothing to do with science and based only on bad data

[Anonymous No.11661268]

>>11661264
>They are claiming Musk is a "anti-science" now
What? When?

[Anonymous No.11661269]

>>11661264
> They are claiming Musk is a "anti-science" now when their decision has nothing to do with science and based only on bad data
>Musk
>Anti-Science
Elon Musk probably knows more about "science" then any of them could ever imagine.

[Anonymous No.11661270]

>>11661264
Why shouldn’t workers be allowed to risk getting a little cough? Might as well argue that alcohol and smoking should be outright illegal.

[Anonymous No.11661273]

>>11660999
Baseless conjecture. Even if Von Braun hadn‘t gotten funding at all without the Nazis, which I highly doubt, someone else would‘ve made some more rockets eventually.

[Anonymous No.11661276]

>>11661270
>Might as well argue that alcohol and smoking should be outright illegal.
And as Prohibition showed us that doesn't work.

[Anonymous No.11661284]

Based retard here, I don't care about the name of a Starship, only that it has a smug anime girl on it.

[Anonymous No.11661288]

>>11661284
same except 2hu instead of anime

[Anonymous No.11661297]

>>11661273
Absolute seethe and whataboutism lmao.

[Anonymous No.11661298]

>>11661284

[Anonymous No.11661299]

>>11661270
"""Progressives""" did, they initiated prohibition and ushered in a lasting organized crime culture which is still being dealt with today. The majority of gang and drug crime which now plagues the country is the direct result of left wing central planning elitists deciding for all of us that (thing I don't like reeee) needs to be banned. And cuckservatives went along with it too because they're never unhappy to take the opportunity to moralize to people.

[Anonymous No.11661304]

>>11661298
do you have the non-edited version of this

[Anonymous No.11661317]

>>11661268
>>11661269
All the popular news/tabloid journos have been labeling Elon has some anti-science nut because of his rant against the lockdown. They were using argument like "Tesla doesn't care about lives of people" or "Tesla is forcing employees to die" dumb shit. We all know the data, the average of death for covid is 80 years old. Average life expectancy in US is 78. 65%+ of people who died from covid are from nursing homes and the roughly same percentage those who die are 80+.

The whole "lets lockdown everything" seemed so draconian to me. When I first saw China do it, everyone called them on the draconian bullshit. Now everyone wants to sacrifice their livelihood and freedom for some "safety" that they already have. This is sacrificing the entire country for boomer generation bullshit.

[Anonymous No.11661318]

>>11661188
Yeah. Germany has been complacent for decades now and people don‘t like to get reminded of that. It‘s a country afraid of any lasting change, which Musk promises to bring to a lot of things. Plus he‘s cocky and Germans hate that.

[Anonymous No.11661322]

>>11661304
>do you have the non-edited version of this
Not him, but the original image didn't have the nose cone.

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VwDh9U3iEj6nVwsavPfvMD.jpg

[Anonymous No.11661324]

>>11661317
>This is sacrificing the entire country for boomer generation bullshit.
Boomers are the worst generation in the history of the country.

[Anonymous No.11661325]

>>11661227
It didn't crash. It's an expendable rocket.

[Anonymous No.11661326]

>>11661325
>his rockets aren't reusable

[Anonymous No.11661327]

>>11661325
Outside of China it's normal to know where the expended parts of a rocket are going to land BEFORE impact.

[Anonymous No.11661336]

>>11661317
So basically what the boomers were already doing to this country, just at an accelerated rate. We're already massively in debt so they can live lifestyles they bought massively beyond their means, and so they can spend a college tuition's worth of money in the last couple months of their increasingly miserable lives.

[Anonymous No.11661341]

>>11661327
also, deliberately targeting LA and NY, while a cool and considerate move, is generally frowned upon

[Anonymous No.11661351]

>>11661341
It's only frowned upon by the """people""" who torment themselves by living there.

[Anonymous No.11661357]

>>11660992
I accept your consession.

[Anonymous No.11661362]

>>11661264
>He'll be bailed out in an instant.
What if they deny bail?

[Anonymous No.11661367]

>>11661362
then the state and county governments get to have a big disagreement

[Anonymous No.11661371]

>>11661362
Has to be something severe, or a flight risk for him to be denied bail. Otherwise it would be cruel and unusual punishment, which will further be a point in lawsuit against California.

[Anonymous No.11661375]

Excuse me, best radiation shielding coming through.

[Anonymous No.11661378]

>>11661362
Trump will have him released

[Anonymous No.11661392]

>>11660828
So many mouthy people on Twatter. Literally who gaf what these people have to say? Some random preaching at Elon about his kid? Wtf
>>11660836
So many mouthy people on here as well

[Anonymous No.11661393]

>>11661375
>laughs in uncharged particle

[Anonymous No.11661395]

>>11661375
>200 tons of shielding for a 20 ton vehicle
>neutrons and gamma rays still don't care

[Anonymous No.11661396]

Oh god please arrest Elon. Not only would it be hilarious but he can tear faggotfornia a new asshole with a fat lawsuit.

[Anonymous No.11661408]

>>11660379
I'm interested anon even if nobody else is

[Anonymous No.11661413]

>>11661396
Tesla(R) Army(tm) when? Will Elon be the one to start the boog, using secretly already finalized Starships to begin a Martian Republic free of the tyrannical gravity of Earth? Day of the McRock drop SOON!

[Anonymous No.11661416]

>>11660828

[Anonymous No.11661417]

It will be nothing but a footnote if all they do is fine Tesla few millions. Tesla will take that over losing billions and potentially slowing down or bankrupting.

[Anonymous No.11661426]

>>11661417
I have a suspicion that the whole shutdown is a ploy to kill any companies that aren't completely compliant to the government or to kill competitors of companies friendly to the government.

[Anonymous No.11661438]

>>11661426
It's not deliberate, but the authoritarian elements of the government have used the irrational hysteria surrounding this virus to seize as much power as they can in the hope they'll keep some of it after the quarantine ends. The reason they're starting to screech now is because the executive branch of the government isn't particularly authoritarian this time around, so they won't get any support in that attempt. It's to the best interests of authoritarians for this crisis to be prolonged as long as possible, preferably indefinitely so central planning becomes the only remaining option to maintain any form of social cohesion, the government did the same thing when it convinced Americans to allow it to retain emergency powers after the end of WW2.

[Anonymous No.11661454]

>>11661438
Exactly. Once you give gov power to strip everyone of all of their freedom, you will never get it back. They'll always have that option. The issue needs to be fought in supreme Court one way or another.

[Anonymous No.11661464]

>>11660431
Fuck I want that.

[Anonymous No.11661486]

>>11659845
>were living in a time line where one of the most massive aerospace projects ever undertaken is actually moving at fairly quick speeds
>there is a high chance SN6 will be fully stacked in june, with a chance it could be ready by end of may.

holy shit, what a time to be alive.

[Anonymous No.11661494]

Looks like the state/county/police folded. State wants county make the call. County wants city police to make the call. Police wants county to make the call. Keep in mind, Fremont city supports Elon. State supports Elon. Its just the county that's going against city/state.

[Anonymous No.11661508]

>>11661494

[Anonymous No.11661516]

>>11661494
HOLY BASED

[Anonymous No.11661582]

>>11658260
Anarcho capitalism isn't real

[Anonymous No.11661583]

>>11661375
wouldn't coils embedded in the exterior hull running at lower power have more effective mass/shielding ratio?

[Anonymous No.11661591]

>>11661375
>weighs a shitload
>requires a shitload of power
>is not very effective
>uses technology we don't even have yet
>radiation isn't even a problem
fuck you

[Anonymous No.11661596]

>>11661408
thank you my love

[Anonymous No.11661616]

I wish Lockheed would restart airliner production so fucking Boing! didn't have a domestic monopoly. That L1011 Stargazer is getting lonely.

[Anonymous No.11661619]

>>11661494
Source

[Anonymous No.11661638]

>>11661616
The issue is that Boeing is so pervasive that choosing another company as an airliner will be seen as unnecessarily risky. It's like trying to make an argument for your company to switch from using a Windows OS to a new unproven OS even if Windows was making computers explode and the new OS wouldn't.

[Anonymous No.11661643]

>>11661616
This
Alternatively, SpaceX develops a stainless steel wide-body airliner that uses turboramjet engines to cruise at mach 3.2 and lobbies the absolute shit out of every country on Earth to allow them to fly over despite the constant sonic boom noise

[Anonymous No.11661644]

>>11661638
>It's like trying to make an argument for your company to switch from using a Windows OS to a new unproven OS even if Windows was making computers explode and the new OS wouldn't.
So basically the old companies won't do it and will get eaten alive by upstarts that do, got it.

[Anonymous No.11661658]

>>11661643
NASA is flying X planes to find shapes that minimize the boom by staggering it into smaller ones.

[Anonymous No.11661659]

>>11661644
Not every business is ripe for disruption. If it took nothing but pluck it wouldn't make billionaires.

[Anonymous No.11661672]

>>11661658
that, plus a turboramjet, will help make SpaceX's plans for suborbital point-to-point obsolete

[Anonymous No.11661673]

>>11660608
valley forge for traditions sake

[Anonymous No.11661674]

>>11661619
Look at the Newsom's video, county's statement, and the police statement. They're all official statements.

[Anonymous No.11661677]

>>11661674
>Look at the Newsom's video, county's statement, and the police statement.

Where are those

[Anonymous No.11661682]

>>11661677
You have to go to California and ask for it in person. I did it myself.

[Anonymous No.11661687]

>>11661682
Oh.

[Anonymous No.11661690]

>>11661672
Both go after a small "gotta go far fast" niche, and if you're going for that you might as well go with the rocket as it's still faster.

[Anonymous No.11661701]

>>11661690
Airplanes can take off from the west coast for eastbound flights.

[Anonymous No.11661735]

>>11661638
Are american airlines not allowed to buy airbus planes? Airbus isn't new or unproven.

[Anonymous No.11661739]

>>11661735
They are for now but I can see that changing given Airbus's ties to China.

[Anonymous No.11661743]

New thread?

[Anonymous No.11661754]

>>11661743
What edition should it have? Retro space art or a non-American spacecraft?

[Anonymous No.11661763]

NEW

>>11661759
>>11661759
>>11661759

[Anonymous No.11661764]

>>11661754

[Anonymous No.11661769]

>>11660922
>>11660999
based and checked.

[Anonymous No.11661824]

>>11658294
oh yeah.

[Anonymous No.11661918]

>>11658294
>>11661824
continued...

I'll just give you a bit of backstory for the "Kzinti lesson", this is from the "Known space" series of books by Larry Niven.

At the time (some years in the future, 2100-2200 humanity was colonizing the solar system in slower than light craft. The kzinti, a race of "cat people" who were very warlike, had slave empires, gravity manipulation and faster than light ships, set its sights on conquering earth.

The kzinti's psychics told them that humanity didn't have any warships, so the invasion went ahead. As the kzinti warped into the humans home system (sol), they found out the true depth of their mistake.

Human space ships had one of two propulsion methods.

One was a beam core fusion torch, pumping out terawatts of power.

The other was a gigantic array of near mercury orbit solar platforms, powering truely staggering laser beam "pushers" for pushing solar sails up to fractions of light speed.

about 15 minutes after warping into the sol system, the kzinti fleet was utterly vaporized by these solar sail pushing lasers, and the rest of the fleet was sliced to ribbons with the beam core fusion drives used as weapons at close range.

The kzinti lesson is as follows: "A reaction drives efficiency as a weapon is proportional to it's efficiency as a drive"

[Anonymous No.11662433]

>>11660197
>cant design a wheel

[Anonymous No.11662447]

>>11660312
>swear if SpaceX weren't around to break the establishment, the majority of people's minds would still be poisoned by Shuttle on the subject of reusability.
That's still the case even with Spacex though.

[Anonymous No.11662456]

>>11660431
>everyday Falcon heavy gets another side booster.jpg

[Anonymous No.11662540]

>>11661638
>t choosing another company as an airliner will be seen as unnecessarily risky.
More risky than buying 737 MAX8s?

[Anonymous No.11662673]

When Boeing decides to do something in space (i.e. Starliner etc.), what makes them choose boeing vs. ULA (which is half Boeing). What is their incentive to go through ULA. Is ULA purely a launch company? Could ULA ever design a lander or a ship?