/sfg/ Spaceflight General

[Anonymous No.12162388]

Vacuum Raptor Static Fire Edition

prev: >>12159089

[Anonymous No.12162398]

>>12162388
I just want to bury my face inside and take a big sniff

[Anonymous No.12162402]

what about >>12162394 ?

[Anonymous No.12162404]

>>12162402
malformed subject line

[Anonymous No.12162406]

>>12162402
This one was first

[Anonymous No.12162407]

https://youtu.be/vFwqZ4qAUkE?t=261

look at the engine bells

holy shit

[Anonymous No.12162411]

FIRST for the FIRST man to ever land a propulsive returning from space

[Anonymous No.12162416]

comfy and easy to wear

[Anonymous No.12162418]

>>12162388
oh yes daddy

[Anonymous No.12162420]

>>12162407
The RS-25 is a sexy beast

[Anonymous No.12162421]

>>12162420
Do they all flex like that when ignited? The stresses they have to tolerate seem insane

[Anonymous No.12162436]

COLONIZE ME INSTEAD YOU FUCKING PANSIES

HNGHHHHHHHHHHH

[Anonymous No.12162449]

>>12162436
>tfw you realize the efficiency of nuclear-powered high temp stirling engines on titan

good god what a paradise

[Anonymous No.12162451]

>>12162421
Probably not as radically, it's important to note that the RS-25 is hovering so close to the edge of underexpansion induced combustion instability that the lip of the bell needs to curve inward just a bit to allow the engine to fire at sea level without wobbling itself into a cloud of shrapnel.
Raptor will not wobble so hard because it isn't as badly underexpanded, and I'd doubt LOX/Kerosene rockets will wobble much at all.
With the F1 the danger was wobble higher up near the combustion chamber, not flexion of the bell itself.

[Anonymous No.12162463]

>>12162451
what about the Sea Dragon, combustion chamber or bell nozzle?

[Anonymous No.12162469]

>>12162463
Probably the combustion chamber given it was supposed to be RP-1/LOX like the F1.

[Anonymous No.12162470]

>>12162463
It would have F1 problems on steroids, assuming it could be done at all, the baffles to prevent it from assploding itself would be huge.

[Anonymous No.12162472]

>>12162436
SUBMERGED METHANE COOLED SERVER FARMS

[Anonymous No.12162487]

>>12162451
>RS-25 constantly on the edge of flinging itself apart
>shuttle hardware needed cleanroom handling
>Starship and Raptor slapped together in a field in Texas
>still within 80s of Isp with way better thrust and bulk density

[Anonymous No.12162492]

can SN8 hurry up and crater so Thundercuck can make a SpaceX BUSTED

[Anonymous No.12162494]

>The launch of a ULA #DeltaIVHeavy rocket carrying the #NROL44 mission for the @NatReconOfc is delayed due to an issue with the swing arm retraction system. Launch is now scheduled for 12:10 a.m. EDT, on Sept. 27, 2020.

[Anonymous No.12162498]

>>12162487
>That'll be 100million dollars per unit please :)

[Anonymous No.12162499]

>>12162498
*165 million dollars
**plus tip

[Anonymous No.12162506]

>>12162411
>suborbital
meh.

[Anonymous No.12162509]

LITERALLY fucking when

[Anonymous No.12162513]

>>12162509
shit wrong board lmao

[Anonymous No.12162517]

>>12162509
Retard, but based

[Anonymous No.12162522]

>>12162416
Instead of stripes, the mission commanders on Artemis get shorts.

[Anonymous No.12162523]

>>12162509
>fucking when
>first flight 1975
Nearly half a century ago, anon.

[Anonymous No.12162545]

>>12162523
yes but slavs still havent added it to my shitty f2p grinding simulator yet

[Anonymous No.12162604]

>>12162509
Plane posting is allowed here anon no worries

[Anonymous No.12162611]

>>12162509
NASA uses planes for high altitude research, therefore planes are /sfg/ related

[Anonymous No.12162627]

>>12162420
>CHANGE MY MIND:
The RS-25 should be reserved for big ass ships that remain in orbit.

[Anonymous No.12162653]

Reminder that there will be femboys on the Moon and Mars and there's literally nothing that you can do to stop this.

[Anonymous No.12162658]

>>12162653
wtf i love the moon and mars now

[Anonymous No.12162660]

>>12162653
mentally unstable individuals will not be allowed on colony ships for a considerable amount of time, but this will eventually happen.

[Anonymous No.12162672]

when can we have /sfg/ on /n/ when Rockets are literally /transportation/ vehicles???

[Anonymous No.12162673]

>>12162660
There's already female astronauts and other minorities that are in space or have been in space. Also women (male) are more mentally stable than women (female)

[Anonymous No.12162683]

>>12162672
Hopefully within this decade if Starship succeeds at closing the gap between space and normal transportation.

[Anonymous No.12162702]

dreamy

[Anonymous No.12162713]

>>12162683
trainfags,bikefags and especially planefags need to see spacefags.

[Anonymous No.12162722]

>>12162653
>wake up from cryosleep
>civilization is nothing but extremely attractive genetically engineered women and traps
>masculine physical features are regarded as primitive and barbaric, like the neanderthal supraorbital ridge is today
>no one will have sex with me

[Anonymous No.12162724]

there's another sfg up now? jeez

[Anonymous No.12162727]

>>12162722
just use future plastic surgery to get yourself "corrected" to the new standard

[Anonymous No.12162732]

>>12162727
>there are no plastic surgeons because ugly people haven't existed for generations

[Anonymous No.12162735]

>>12162722
No, there will be a small minority of Chads - just enough to satisfy the needs of women and femboys.

[Anonymous No.12162738]

>STILL haven't nuked the moon
bros wtf I want to be able to go outside and watch that shit

[Anonymous No.12162746]

>>12162735
>a renegade band of chad rebels breach my captivity cell and rescue me
>realize the future is the "angel one" episode of tng and I should kill myself

[Anonymous No.12162764]

>only 9007mm

[Anonymous No.12162782]

>>12162627
I'd want a more advanced version with better reusability, like a hydrolox Raptor. The SSMEs needed repairs beetween flights.

[Anonymous No.12162791]

>>12162611
Also air launch and shuttle carriers.

[Anonymous No.12162823]

Speaking of which, how thicc are starship's walls? Has it been mentioned anywhere?

[Anonymous No.12162826]

>>12162823
4500mm RHA equivalent composite armor

[Anonymous No.12162831]

>>12162545
T-2 is 99% the same.

[Anonymous No.12162834]

>>12162823
I think the nerdle fuckheads said it was like 2 dimes stacked?

[Anonymous No.12162857]

>>12162509
>F-1
Close enough

[Anonymous No.12162867]

>>12162702
imagine getting to lick the inside of their space diapers

[Anonymous No.12162873]

>>12162831
muh rockets
muh missiles
muh IR guided bombs

[Anonymous No.12162878]

>>12162857
Damn, that reminds me how much I wanted an F-1B based EELV. The Saturn Multibody from Eyes Turned Skyward makes me feel things.

[Anonymous No.12162886]

>>12162857
>F-1B with under 100 parts
DAMN that's cool.

[Anonymous No.12162888]

>>12162878
>propulsive flyback with 9 F-1Bs

[Anonymous No.12162889]

>>12162857
Orange rocket bad, but partially orange booster good.

[Anonymous No.12162892]

>>12162888
>RTLS with nine F-1Bs
That pad better be solid rock all the way down.

[Anonymous No.12162899]

>>12162888
>9 F-1Bs
Would that make it a super-Nova?

[Anonymous No.12162903]

I just realized that 30+ Raptors on the first stage plus 6 Raptors on Starship means the full stack will be pushing something close to 80 turobpimps. That's a lot of turbo machinery.

[Anonymous No.12162945]

>>12162903
Imagine the vibrations

[Anonymous No.12162956]

starship vibrators when?

[Anonymous No.12162975]

>>12162416
White is sus

[Anonymous No.12162977]

>>12162956
With flaps?

[Anonymous No.12162979]

>>12162857
>2020
> still exhausting your turbo pumps outside the combustion chamber.

[Anonymous No.12162982]

>>12162702
I want to die in her thighs holy shit

[Anonymous No.12162985]

>>12162823
4mm sheet steel for the tanks

[Anonymous No.12162997]

>>12162985
i am pretty sure 4mm is to thick for propellant tanks probably closer to 1mm

[Anonymous No.12163005]

>>12162997
no, not for something 9m in diameter
skin thickness scales with volume

[Anonymous No.12163007]

>Yes! Epic win! Drumpf btfo
I swear these children have smooth brains. Voting from orbit has already been a thing for a long, long time

[Anonymous No.12163008]

>>12162979
Would Starship still work if you replaced the Raptors with scaled up methalox Merlins?

[Anonymous No.12163015]

>>12162977
Yes.

[Anonymous No.12163017]

>>12163008
That's exactly what starship is dilbert

[Anonymous No.12163018]

>>12163008
Engines have to be designed specifically for the fuel they consume, and even if you could scale up a merlin like that it probably wouldn’t be as efficient or produce anywhere near as much thrust as the almighty raptor. So I guess the answer is technically yes, but you would wish you had raptors.

[Anonymous No.12163021]

>>12163008
it would suck more but yes I think it would mostly work

[Anonymous No.12163029]

>>12160329
He's right, you know.
If they can be craned up by the nose to be put on SH then they can just as easily be swung around each other by a giant steel rope in space.

[Anonymous No.12163032]

>>12163017
No, Raptors are fancy wizard engines that shit on the best the Soviets could offer. Merlin is cheap and simple, and dramatically less efficient.

[Anonymous No.12163034]

>>12163029
Forgot pic.

[Anonymous No.12163037]

>>12163029
>>12163034
spaceplane nunchucks

[Anonymous No.12163039]

Starship will be a complete failure unless they switch to carbon fiber structure and hydrolox.

[Anonymous No.12163044]

>>12163039
Had me in the first half lmao

[Anonymous No.12163074]

STARSHIP WITH A CENTAUR V PAYLOAD WHICH ITSELF CARRIES AN INERTIAL UPPER STAGE WHICH ITSELF CARRIES A STAR 48 WHICH ITSELF CARRIES A PHOTON WHICH ITSELF CARRIES AN E CLASS MODEL ROCKET MOTOR FOR YEETING A SINGLE ONE POUND RAINBOW DILDO TO ALPHA CENTAURI

[Anonymous No.12163077]

>>12163074
Have we killed the outgassing tape EM drive meme yet? If not, add that to the model rocket motor

[Anonymous No.12163082]

>>12162823
just under 4mm

[Anonymous No.12163084]

>>12163074
>fuck the Aliens
>guess who is probing now

[Anonymous No.12163085]

>>12163074
ONE
HUNDRED
STAGE
YEET
TRAIN

[Anonymous No.12163094]

>>12163029
>>12163034
this will n e v e r happen retard

[Anonymous No.12163096]

>>12163094
retard
this is the only (You) you get tonight

[Anonymous No.12163106]

Sammy is going to the moon

[Anonymous No.12163111]

>>12163094
But why not?
There's not any major problems I can think of with it.
Only thing you'd need is some extra RCS stuff to get it going and eventually stop it.

[Anonymous No.12163113]

they've hooked the flapperinos

[Anonymous No.12163129]

>>12163111
because you can accomplish the same thing with a dedicated hab module + tether without wasting development capital trying to jerry rig this shit on starship. besides, starship enables cheap module launches anyway

[Anonymous No.12163139]

>>12163129
>dedicated hab module
cheaper to just use Starship, it will already be designed, no need to reinvent the wheel
of course, the real problem with it is that it enforces a consistent direction of gravity on the occupants, reducing your useable volume considerably

[Anonymous No.12163147]

>>12163139
just because something is possible doesn't make it cheap, practical, or useful. starship was not built to be a rotating space station. it will never be one

[Anonymous No.12163153]

>>12163147
>Starship was not built to be a rotating space station
things that are required to be a rotating space station:
1. it needs to be able to be hung from the nose under a significant fraction of one Earth surface gravity
2. it needs to be able to be habitable under a significant fraction of one Earth surface gravity

hmmm, let's see, does Mars colony Starship qualify for this? Yes. Yes it does.

[Anonymous No.12163156]

>>12163147
No but it's being built to accommodate crane-stacking via lift points in the nose, and it has RCS because it needs that anyway.

[Anonymous No.12163157]

>>12163153
ok bro don't get mad when it doesn't happen

[Anonymous No.12163162]

>>12163157
of course not, literally the only people who want space stations are NASA, and they would never do something that simple and effective
SpaceX have zero plans for this sort of thing, because their plans are entirely focused on Mars and you don't need spingrav for a trip that lasts less than half of a year
so in summary, tin can nunchuck space station is:
1. simple
2. effective
3. cheap
4. never fucking happening

[Anonymous No.12163195]

The first trans astronaut. Will she be cute bros?

[Anonymous No.12163197]

>>12163195
>she

[Anonymous No.12163198]

>>12163111
It depends on how much gravity you want.
If you want 1g it would be very demanding on many levels, a very light gravity isn't really worth it anyway.
ISS has already proven we can safely stay in microgravity for months, that's what you need to reach mars.

[Anonymous No.12163200]

>>12162653
Unhealthy people don’t go to space, so no, there won’t be.

[Anonymous No.12163204]

>>12162722
Women are stupid and insane. Could never run a civilization.

[Anonymous No.12163205]

I need to get to mars before they start closing the borders

[Anonymous No.12163207]

>>12163205
I need to get my guns to Mars

[Anonymous No.12163214]

>He fell for Mars colonization meme

[Anonymous No.12163217]

>>12163195
she would be
"he" won't be

he won't be
"she" won't be either

[Anonymous No.12163224]

>>12163214
is this a tranny

[Anonymous No.12163225]

>>12163214
looks more like he fell for the neckbeard meme
or maybe forgetting to shave and straighten his glasses meme
basically, the amount of fucks this man has to give has dropped to zero

[Anonymous No.12163235]

>>12162722
>implying they wouldn't find you super-exotic and fight over you for the novelty of fucking an ancient human

[Anonymous No.12163239]

>>12163217
based and not gay

[Anonymous No.12163300]

>>12163113
WOAH BROS why dey do dat

[Anonymous No.12163374]

>>12162494
Even more ground equipment failure, this time the swing arm retraction. What the fuck are they paying ULA for again?

[Anonymous No.12163381]

RESULTS
OVER
RHETORIC

[Anonymous No.12163389]

>>12162253
It's realy hard to have something float in a hydrogen/helium athmosphere, so a ballon wouldn't exactly be a good option.
And in addition to that it takes like 45 km/s to just reach jupiter orbit again.
>>12162266
>space elevator
>on fucking jupiter
Not going to happen, we can't even do that on earth.
>>12162290
>getting nukes into space
That's a geopolitical nightmare.

The only realistic way I could see would be a NERVA style engine that uses the athmosphere of jupiter as reaction mass to fly around in the athmosphere and switches over to internal reserves when it launches again.
It then drops tanks when they are depleted.
A big issue would be the thrust/weight ratio since Jupiter has like 25 m/s^2 gravity.

[Anonymous No.12163421]

>>12163389
>Not going to happen, we can't even do that on earth.
is there even a material capable of doing that? even if we include every sci fi bs normally brought up together with space elevators?

[Anonymous No.12163424]

>>12162411
>to ever land a propulsive returning from space
landing a tin can that doesn't lift anything worth shit and struggles to hit 100km isn't impressive.

[Anonymous No.12163472]

>>12163225
Shaving is stupid. If you can grow a big beard, grow one.

[Anonymous No.12163479]

>>12163424
>there's an alternate timeline where spacex doesn't exist and new shepards hops are the only cool thing happening in space flight
count your blessings children

[Anonymous No.12163485]

>>12162653
i can airlock them

[Anonymous No.12163581]

>>12162722
>civilization is nothing but extremely attractive genetically engineered women and traps
That's my ideal world desu

[Anonymous No.12163586]

can someone educate me who these space wojaks represent
I only know Zubrin

[Anonymous No.12163617]

>>12162724
Check the last thread, apparently someone started one within a couple minutes of this one.
ALWAYS check your staging, and ALWAYS check that there isn't another /sfg/ before you click on the Post button.

[Anonymous No.12163626]

>>12162402
no /sfg/ in title

[Anonymous No.12163629]

>>12163153
Reminder that you can't dock on a spinning nunchuk space station because you can only dock at the center of its rotating frame of reference. There's no way short of ungodly precise active vectored thrust (or stopping the rotation) to dock to the bits at the end of the tether.
It's still okay if you're just going to Mars though, since there's nobody who needs to dock with you.
It's still not going to happen.

[Anonymous No.12163633]

>>12163617
that image made me smile. thank u anon.

[Anonymous No.12163634]

>>12163195
It will be the first space suicide once it gets tired of dilating.

[Anonymous No.12163638]

>>12162653
Jews won't be going to Mars so no

[Anonymous No.12163696]

>>12163586
>bilingual in English and DoD Powerpoint

[Anonymous No.12163720]

>>12163421
On earth?
Carbon nano tubes could do that.
On Jupiter?
I'd have to calculate that, but probably no.

A Jupiter sample return is probably amongst the highest delta V operations I could think of when excluding insane shit like solar sample return or stuff outside the solar system.
And we have no vehicle capable of such a mission, like a FH with a Centaur with a Star 48 ontop with a hypergolic stage ontop with a tiny spacecraft that has its own hypergolic engine would be insufficient for a Jupiter sample return.

Closest thing I would consider reasonable would be to skim the upper athmosphere of Jupiter with a probe and try to get a sample there.
But that's also insane as you would be insanely fast in the upper athmosphere and even a minor deviation would cause the spacecraft to burn up or not get close enough.
And it's not even usefull as the sample will get contaminated by the heatshield ablating.

[Anonymous No.12163742]

>>12163300
Wind.

[Anonymous No.12163760]

>>12162407
>>12162420
Was waiting till someone said that the Raptor Vac looks like an RS-25

[Anonymous No.12163780]

>>12162979
F-1B was basically a fuckhuge Merlin which means we could have used it to build an RTLS 500' tall Nova-sized Falcon 9 clone that could put an S-II sized payload into LEO (or a Falcon Heavy based off of those Nova-sized RTLS cores that could yeet a S-II sized payload into GEO).

I'm kinda hoping that ULA has something like this on the drawing board as an answer to Starship.

>>12163720
A Jupiter sample return mission will require something absolutely insane like the magnetic confinement hydrogen-boosted matter-antimatter torch drive that the ship in Avatar had.

[Anonymous No.12163797]

>>12163742
So it will launch like this?

[Anonymous No.12163804]

>>12163797
no

[Anonymous No.12163809]

>>12163638
(((zubrin)))

[Anonymous No.12163812]

>>12163804
thanks, ellen mungsk

[Anonymous No.12163815]

>>12163300

[Anonymous No.12163817]

>>12163809
Not at his age. Shuttle and SLS cucked him out of that chance.

[Anonymous No.12163821]

>>12163817
viking funeral for zubrin burning up in mars atmosphere when

[Anonymous No.12163824]

>>12163821
After he dies, I should hope

[Anonymous No.12163833]

>>12163824
starship-assisted suicide

[Anonymous No.12163839]

>>12163833
Elon would build him a 10-foot mini-starship coffin out of respect

[Anonymous No.12163848]

>>12163214
before smartphone addiction
during smartphone addiction

[Anonymous No.12163853]

SN-8 on the move, just letting you know.

[Anonymous No.12163859]

Is it conceivable that SpaceX yeets a couple prototypes at mars in 2022? instead of scrapping then, try their luck at mars reentry

[Anonymous No.12163872]

SN8 ON THE MOVE

[Anonymous No.12163874]

Guys

[Anonymous No.12163883]

SN8 happening

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5ozYnVQahE&feature=emb_logo&ab_channel=LabPadre

[Anonymous No.12163885]

>>12162722
>shoot all the faggots
>take the women
>free the chads imprisoned for refusing to be ghey
>start a revolution
>find the old ass Jews who rule the "society" and kill their Minecraft villager asses
>restore humanity

[Anonymous No.12163888]

>>12163853
>>12163872
>>12163874
>>12163883

Wouldn't it make sense to be able to pressure test starships closer to the factory in the future? The explosions are pretty modest right?

Do they have to roll it back to install the nosecone?

[Anonymous No.12163891]

>>12163885
this is your brain on incel

[Anonymous No.12163898]

everyone wave goodbye to sn8. sn7 popped at 4 bar, and now they got a whole sn8 made of 304L. rip little shitter

[Anonymous No.12163900]

>>12163888
No, not really. You can't really get a sense of scale when they're out at the launch site but when that thing blows, just like any rocket, it's bad. All it takes is a flying bulkhead to crash through a tent and they're set back a couple months.

As for the nosecone they'll probably roll that out separately just like they will with the 3 Raptors. I'd expect the nosecone to be rolled out before the first cryo test mainly because they'll need to test how the nosecone holds up when there is Liquid Nitrogen on board.

[Anonymous No.12163903]

>>12163891
You can cry buzzwords all you want, but Elon already knows about your masters. He'll make sure that they can't touch the gentiles (us) on Mars.

[Anonymous No.12163904]

>>12163891
cringe

[Anonymous No.12163907]

>>12163898
>popped at 4 bar [citation needed]

[Anonymous No.12163910]

>>12163898
>Designated SN7 but was only a small scale test tank. During a test on 15 June 2020, the tank began to leak at a pressure of 7.6 bar.[77][78] After repairs, the tank was tested to destruction on 23 June 2020.[79]

SN8 is made out SN7 304L, you're probably thinking of 7.1 which was a different steel and I haven't heard an official pressure for that. The welds broke so either you can't weld it for shit or something went wrong with the welds

[Anonymous No.12163912]

>>12163903
based genital

>>12163900
they've never tested the header tanks...will they static fire using them?

[Anonymous No.12163915]

I think I'm too used to the size of test tanks or haven't remembered how big they are, but SN8 is a big one.

[Anonymous No.12163919]

I feel like there should be an upgrade to the Falcon 9 that is still a thin, rocket.
What if we made a Falcon 10 that was basically a skinny starship +superheavy with lesser numbers of Raptors?

[Anonymous No.12163920]

>>12163912
My theory is they will test them and the flaps during the cryo test to see how they hold up. Probably same for static fire.

[Anonymous No.12163921]

So wait, what's next on the agenda for sn8?

[Anonymous No.12163926]

>>12163921
cryo, static, checkouts, static, 20km hop

[Anonymous No.12163927]

>>12163921
A pressure test similar to that of MK1, I assume.

[Anonymous No.12163928]

>>12163915
Just realized starship will look like a penguin with thermal tiles

[Anonymous No.12163929]

>>12163919
The Air Force gave SpaceX a contract to develop a raptor upper stage for the F9/FH a few years back but I guess it never went anywhere

[Anonymous No.12163932]

>>12162509
>2020
>still playing bore blunder

[Anonymous No.12163942]

How much to pay for starship to draw a BIG DICK/PENIS on the side?

[Anonymous No.12163943]

>>12163074
>YEETING A SINGLE ONE POUND RAINBOW DILDO TO ALPHA CENTAURI

[Anonymous No.12163944]

>>12163926
>>12163927
In non-Elon time, how long will that take

[Anonymous No.12163947]

>>12163944
last week of october

[Anonymous No.12163949]

>>12163944
Well the 20km hop is scheduled for NET Oct 11th (going off of filings) so probably about as long as that with maybe an extra week added on.

[Anonymous No.12163951]

>>12163944
1 month tops

[Anonymous No.12163953]

>>12163629
>Reminder that you can't dock on a spinning nunchuk space station
No. It's necessary. Analyze the Starships' spin.

[Anonymous No.12163954]

>>12163915
!today

[Anonymous No.12163958]

this shit looks so much sexier than mk1 with its retard flaps outstretched

[Anonymous No.12163962]

>>12163958
anyone got that pic of gay retard mk1?

[Anonymous No.12163964]

>>12163919
Being thin and tall is shit, the only purpose of it is overland travel. Since they'll be forced to develop alternate infrastructure for starship anyway with much higher throughput there is no reason to ever go back to pencildick rockets.

[Anonymous No.12163965]

>>12163929
It could still work, RapVac's nozzle is only 2.4m in diameter so it could easily fit within the interstage fairing of a Falcon booster. The question I'd have is would it be worth it to have such a large engine for only about 25-30s of ISP increase when it would also incur the cost of developing a new LOX/CH4 second stage which will also be significantly larger if you want to actually fire that Raptor for more than a few seconds. Also Raptor is twice as powerful as the most recent Merlin 1D vacuum engine, I'd question whether or not the Falcon booster could even support a payload that much larger. A Raptor upper stage might be useful for Falcon Heavy, and considering you've still got another full meter of room inside the Falcon interstage fairing, you could even do a vacuum raptor with a drop-down expansion nozzle that might be able to push the ISP to the mid 390's.

[Anonymous No.12163968]

>>12163958
mk1 was just panels of steel bolted together. shit was never gonna even make it off the ground

[Anonymous No.12163972]

>>12163968
I'm glad they pressurized it anyway lol

[Anonymous No.12163978]

>>12163965
add nitro and then voila, 400 isp

[Anonymous No.12163981]

>>12162672
when we can decide who are the Freds and fixies of rocket flight

[Anonymous No.12163983]

>>12163968
>>12163962
>>12163958

It was just a real-sized mockup.

[Anonymous No.12163987]

Who's that dumbass on NSF that won't shut his mouthbreathing trap?

[Anonymous No.12163988]

>>12163915
yes, it's big

[Anonymous No.12163992]

>>12163978
it's pronounced "voila"

[Anonymous No.12163993]

>>12163983
That's a big rocket.

[Anonymous No.12163995]

>>12163983
*that they pressurized

[Anonymous No.12163996]

>>12163947
>>12163949
>>12163951
October is next week even, shit is moving so fast.

[Anonymous No.12163999]

>>12163983
that is a BIG COCKIN FAIRING

[Anonymous No.12164002]

>>12163915
Is it going up without the cone or is it applied on the stand?

[Anonymous No.12164005]

>>12163983
they absolutely planned to fly the thing. it was just after it exploded that everyone here decided it to be a mockup retroactively

[Anonymous No.12164006]

>>12163995
>>12163972

Oh, it wasnt just a mockup, it had functional tanks aswell? Neat.

[Anonymous No.12164011]

>>12164006
https://youtu.be/3nTSubYzQOM

[Anonymous No.12164013]

R8 the main workhorse I made for the LSA (Loli Space Agency)

Methlox first and second stages.

[Anonymous No.12164014]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GABa3EzKjNA

[Anonymous No.12164020]

>>12164013
t
h
i
n

[Anonymous No.12164035]

T H I C K

[Anonymous No.12164040]

[Anonymous No.12164046]

[Anonymous No.12164047]

>>12163910
Both SN7 and SN7.1 used 304L

[Anonymous No.12164049]

>>12164035
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDJ4l6Mc-IM
based

[Anonymous No.12164053]

>>12164005
They called off on flying it before it even popped.

[Anonymous No.12164055]

>>12163928
>penguin
Um, anon...
>>12163953
why don't you just try it in KSP

[Anonymous No.12164069]

>>12164013
Uhhh
STIC

[Anonymous No.12164071]

This is one thing inflatables won't get you

[Anonymous No.12164074]

>>12164071
A... Truss?

[Anonymous No.12164078]

>>12164074
REFLECTIONS KINO

[Anonymous No.12164081]

>>12164074
My guess is he's talking about the rails?

>>12164071
We just need to let astronauts do spacewalks without having to go through rails. Make the pack thruster systems with redundancy so they can still move if any thrusters fail

[Anonymous No.12164087]

>>12164071
What do you mean? You can always add attachment points for handrails or even have them folded up in the design for expando/inflato habs. Once they're pressurized the surface is going to be just as rigid as an aluminum can hab.
They'll still need large solar arrays and radiators, they'll still need illumination lamp booms and antennae and everything else a space station has.
You can even give them a hard metal outer shell after they've been inflated, if there are still concerns about durability.

[Anonymous No.12164092]

>>12164087
>>12164081
I'm talking about the reflections off the modules you bakas

>You can even give them a hard metal outer shell after they've been inflated
I guess that's one way to preserve it

[Anonymous No.12164106]

[Anonymous No.12164112]

[Anonymous No.12164117]

>>12164055
>why don't you just try it in KSP
Don't tempt me.

[Anonymous No.12164122]

[Anonymous No.12164125]

>>12163872
No nosecone?

[Anonymous No.12164127]

[Anonymous No.12164129]

>>12163780
>F-1B was basically a fuckhuge Merlin which means we could have used it to build an RTLS 500' tall Nova-sized Falcon 9 clone that could put an S-II sized payload into LEO (or a Falcon Heavy based off of those Nova-sized RTLS cores that could yeet a S-II sized payload into GEO).

I'm kinda hoping that ULA has something like this on the drawing board as an answer to Starship.
Damn, how many tons into LEO could that bring up?

[Anonymous No.12164140]

>>12163944
Mid october, he'll have the starship conference right after the hop

[Anonymous No.12164142]

>>12164129
there can be only one answer to starship

[Anonymous No.12164143]

We are all Team Space! Yeah!!!

[Anonymous No.12164146]

[Anonymous No.12164149]

>>12163983
Man, SN8 looks so smooth in comparison

[Anonymous No.12164154]

[Anonymous No.12164155]

>>12164142
put it on a powerful first stage and go tour the solar system

[Anonymous No.12164159]

Starship = Falcon XX change my mind

[Anonymous No.12164161]

>>12163874
Mate them you cowards

[Anonymous No.12164162]

Can they just STOP reading superchats till the end for fucks sake

[Anonymous No.12164163]

It's going out for a pressure test right? Doesn't look like the engines are on.

[Anonymous No.12164165]

>>12163964
>there is no reason to ever go back to pencildick rockets.
We should go for full dick chad rockets now instead, Starship is a good start

[Anonymous No.12164166]

>>12164154
>We meet again, Starhopper. My powers have doubled since we last met.

[Anonymous No.12164169]

>>12164163
Yes various pressure tests, then static fire tests, and then flight test.

[Anonymous No.12164170]

>>12164162
>He doesn't have stream muted

[Anonymous No.12164171]

>>12164163
cryotest -> static fire -> flight

Nosecones maybe added somewhere in the middle

[Anonymous No.12164174]

>>12164162
There's not like there's any sound from the pad worth listening to. Just put it on mute and leave it running the video for the same result.

[Anonymous No.12164175]

>>12164166
2 * 0 = 0
rip SN8, got too cocky

[Anonymous No.12164176]

>>12164154
Do we know anything about how much the wing design has changed? From a dummy's point of view, it just looks like the geometry slightly changed and they fully covered the connections.

[Anonymous No.12164180]

>>12164155
shhh, no first stages, only dreams now

[Anonymous No.12164183]

>>12164170
>>12164174
I like listening to babbling mouth breathers, but the fake praise and thanking makes me want to sperg

[Anonymous No.12164186]

>>12164183
>not unironically simping for mary

[Anonymous No.12164189]

>>12164035
>>12164040
>>12164046
>william black
my nigga

[Anonymous No.12164193]

>>12164142
>you have to incorporate this technology that has been proven to not work in this design
>the cheaper alternative that actually works is unacceptable
>sorry we have to cancel your funding because the project clearly isnt working because of that piece of technology
Was this the most bone-headed decision made by NASA?

[Anonymous No.12164195]

>>12164166
>Good, twice the pride, double the fall

[Anonymous No.12164197]

>>12164193
material science good now to make venturestar. we can 3d print the hole venturestar in modern day

[Anonymous No.12164199]

>>12164193
>Was this the most bone-headed decision made by NASA?
>allowed challenger to fly
>didn't rescue columbia
>built the shittle
>building sls
>killed saturn family
not even close

[Anonymous No.12164204]

>>12164189
What in the fuck is this shit

[Anonymous No.12164207]

>>12164204
nuclear pulse propulsion, baby

[Anonymous No.12164209]

>>12164197
Da!

[Anonymous No.12164220]

>>12164176
The joints were covered during the presentation, though with a different design. See >>12163983

[Anonymous No.12164227]

>>12164193
It wasn't NASA, in this case it's an actual real world case of "Thanks Obama". POTUS cancelled it directly. I doubt though that it was a malicious thing, I think some congressperson or other pencil pusher retard who didn't give a damn just told him "hey this nu-shuttle thing is way over, just cancel it" and he didn't give a fuck about space so he did.

[Anonymous No.12164233]

>>12164193
>>12164197

I haven't looked into this but when I try reading some of the internet historiography on venturestar it sounds like NASA made the right decisions but had some horrible luck when it came to timing.

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2006/01/x-33venturestar-what-really-happened/

What it sounds like was really going on here was that the composite tanks were going to be necessary for the full-scale venturestar, but they were taking too long to develop and lockheed just wanted to use aluminum-lithium for the demonstration. NASA correctly understood that venturestar was DOA with investors if lockheed couldn't get the tankage issues fixed first, and that the x33 would just be a stunt without them.

The unfortunate timing was that NASA was already committed to Constellation by the time the tank issues were resolved and they couldn't just reverse course again, even though they probably would have if they were given a choice.

I'd have to go look through congressional transcripts to see if that's actually what happened but that's certainly how it sounds to me.

>>12164199
There can never be a stupider decision than killing a rocket which was already up and running with a 100% mission success rate with no replacement.

[Anonymous No.12164234]

>>12163586
I think the others are just idealized stereotypes like most Wojaks.

[Anonymous No.12164237]

[Anonymous No.12164238]

>>12164237
SPACE BOOOBIEEESS

[Anonymous No.12164241]

>>12164238
They're radiation vests you PIG

[Anonymous No.12164244]

>>12164199
>killed saturn family
At least that had some logic behind it. The Saturns were rushed designs that weren't optimized for cost. With NASA's budget shrinking they had to find a way to reduce the cost of launches swiftly, and the Shuttle was projected to be the solution. The decision was bad in hindsight, but at the time the bad would be harder to see.

[Anonymous No.12164250]

>>12164237
>the flag pins
KHAZAR MILKERS
IN SPAAAAAAAAAAACE

[Anonymous No.12164252]

>>12164241

[Anonymous No.12164259]

>>12164237
What she looked like when I met her in space bar

>>12164241
When I woke up in the morning

[Anonymous No.12164261]

>>12164233
>tfw theres an alternate timeline where saturn v production continued
>tfw its not this timeline
>tfw no cheaper, stronger saturn v upgrade using f-1a
>tfw no manned venus flyby
>tfw no giant outer planets probes
>tfw no mars direct using saturn
>tfw no space station freedom built out of skylab tier modules
>tfw no continued apollo program featuring missions to the dark side and poles
>tfw no moonbase
>tfw 40 years and billions of dollars were wasted on a useless little shitstain of a spaceplane that needlessly killed 14 astronauts.

[Anonymous No.12164262]

>tfw in an alternate history the X-33 is successful and scaled up to the Venture Star and replaces the space shuttle and we get treated to the first true SSTO loading up crew and cargo horizontally and taking off vertically straight to space and with slightly more dV up there to maneuver than the shuttle had thanks to aerospike efficiency on takeoff

[Anonymous No.12164264]

>>12164262
>instead of relying on the Russians for nearly a decade we ride up to our station in style in the coolest and safest spaceplane around while waiting for NASA to get their shit together with returning to the moon at some point

[Anonymous No.12164269]

[Anonymous No.12164270]

>>12164261
Congress wouldn't allow the Saturn V to continue existing after Apollo. It would give NASA too much BEO capability and thus may potentially stir the public to support another expensive Apollo-like program. Shuttle turned out to be perfect for Congress because of its heavily distributed production line and that it crippled NASA's space capabilities.

[Anonymous No.12164277]

>>12164264
instead of waiting for shit launch cistern we could have had a dozen venturestar launches to assemble our lunar transport in leo

[Anonymous No.12164280]

[Anonymous No.12164281]

>>12164270
whenever i think about it i actually get pissed off irl

[Anonymous No.12164283]

>>12164280

[Anonymous No.12164284]

>>12164277
Maybe even able to send the Venture Stars directly to the moon and back with refueling, I wonder if Venture Star's metallic TPS would survive Earth re-entry from lunar orbit?

[Anonymous No.12164285]

>>12164244
It's easy to see in hindsight, but there were people who saw it at the time too. The fixed cost of Saturn V infrastructure was ~$500 million and NASA's budget never went below $3 billion. They could have easily kept production going while working on a new system to reduce launch costs if they had just gone with something that didn't have the massive development costs of the shuttle. If it turned out that the new system worked as advertised, THEN that would be the time to retire the Saturn V.

>>12164270
Cancelling Saturn V production was entirely NASA's decision in 1968. There were congressmen who were critical of the decision because they just assumed NASA was going to restart production at some point and the delay was wasting money.

[Anonymous No.12164289]

>>12164283

[Anonymous No.12164291]

>>12164262

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciYWLbjH5qc

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[Anonymous No.12164292]

>>12164237
I was told that boob armor wasn't a thing on /tg/

[Anonymous No.12164295]

>>12164285
>There were congressmen who were critical of the decision because they just assumed NASA was going to restart production at some point and the delay was wasting money.
Source?

[Anonymous No.12164296]

I don't want to make an extra thread for this so I'll ask here:
I was wondering how the moon and the tides are linked temporally.
Now, I know HOW the moon creates the tides: water is attracted by the moon (and sun) and thereby gathers in a sort of water hill under which the earth just rotates. I also know that both the arrival of the tides and the rising of the moon both move around an hour out of sync with the solar day each day.
Want I want to know: When I stand at a coastline and the moon is currently above me in its zenith, can I be sure that it is currently high tide or does the water "lag behind".

[Anonymous No.12164299]

>>12164284
>Venture Stars directly to the moon and back with refueling
could work but then you'd have 100 tons of dead weight to lug around for the trip, not worth it
>if Venture Star's metallic TPS would survive Earth re-entry from lunar orbit?
unlikely, it was designed with leo in mind only, anything else would probably be too heavy

[Anonymous No.12164300]

>>12164289
better quality, god i love that tongue bite, SO CUTE

[Anonymous No.12164309]

>>12164233
>There can never be a stupider decision than killing a rocket which was already up and running with a 100% mission success rate with no replacement.
Post Apollo budget cuts meant Saturn V was not at all sustainable.
They could only have kept the Saturn IB operational for longer while figuring out how to build a shuttle that doesn't suck as well as the other planned infrastructure of the STS.
Alternatively they could have developed an optimized launch vehicle based on a single F1 engine and some RCS-thrusters for roll controll and an existing upper stage from a Saturn IB.

[Anonymous No.12164312]

>>12164252
wait did they have a real shower in the skylab

[Anonymous No.12164317]

>>12164295
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d03576130j&view=1up&seq=11

Fiscal year 1970 NASA authorization hearings are a great read, especially the contractor reports where Boeing and North American and McDonnell-Douglas go through their post-apollo plans.

Screencap is one example but there's lots more in there, it's a really long document.

[Anonymous No.12164319]

>>12164237
>the men's vests have boobies and israel flags too

[Anonymous No.12164320]

>>12164312
yus

[Anonymous No.12164322]

>>12164312
yep, didn't work very well iirc

[Anonymous No.12164334]

>>12164154
Promising sign that the design hasn't really changed in the past year.

[Anonymous No.12164340]

>>12164320
Pete conrad strikes me as the type of guy to float around butt ass naked and not give a shit

[Anonymous No.12164341]

>>12164299
True it simply would function perfectly as a pure shuttle replacement for LEO, capsules should be reserved for lunar and further orbit missions, it's much cooler and stylish to arrive and return in a spaceplane than a capsule for ISS missions imo

Crew Dragon/Starliner are nice but unnecessary if Venture Star was around, I really wish we had Venture Star to cover LEO so all these companies and NASA wouldn't have wasted time just trying to get that capability back once the Shuttle was retired

[Anonymous No.12164344]

>>12164309
Saturn V was not sustainable if they wanted to also develop a shuttle which flew 60 times a year. If they had been willing to accept a less capable spacecraft (like McDonnell's suggestion here) for LEO operations then it would have been doable. But they weren't.

[Anonymous No.12164345]

>>12164340
>Picks the next nuclear strike while in the shower

[Anonymous No.12164346]

>>12164299
>unlikely, it was designed with leo in mind only, anything else would probably be too heavy
Depends on how you enter the athmosphere.
If you do an aerobraking maneuver first, fly another orbit and then do the actual re-entry, the thermal loads aren't higher than normal.

[Anonymous No.12164348]

Man what is it about SSTO Spaceplanes that makes them so alluring

[Anonymous No.12164351]

How can one space program be so based?

[Anonymous No.12164356]

>>12164344
That was my point:
Build a smaller LEO-focused launch vehicle based up on the technology from Apollo as a means of launching untill a shuttle has been developed that doesn't suck.
Wich would have probably been the '90s or so, but that's still better than how it turned out.

[Anonymous No.12164357]

>>12164351

[Anonymous No.12164359]

>>12164348
They invoke pretty much every other kind of transport, all of which are much more common and higher output than space transport is today.

[Anonymous No.12164360]

>>12164346
good point, still doesn't make it worth doing tho

[Anonymous No.12164369]

>>12164351
>>12164357
hol up /sfg/ told me old space wasn't based

[Anonymous No.12164371]

>>12164357

[Anonymous No.12164374]

>>12164261
>tfw no space station freedom built out of skylab tier modules
i believe you mean 10-meter diameter modules with more than double the volume of skylab anon...

>tfw no giant outer planets probes

no giant outer planets probes launched on on a nerva-powered upper stage...

[Anonymous No.12164404]

>>12164371
>>12164357
>>12164351
somehow I feel like the Artemis versions of these checklists/books won't have nearly as much SOUL as these did

[Anonymous No.12164405]

>>12164374
>10-meter diameter modules
not hard to believe, skylab only weighed 77 tons out of the saturns v's full 120 ton capacity

[Anonymous No.12164413]

>>12164356
But with the money saved by going with a smaller LEO vehicle I'm pretty sure you can continue Saturn V production. Maybe not an ongoing lunar program, but you could at least use them to launch station modules and probes and maybe even fuel for pr*p*ll*nt d*p*ts

[Anonymous No.12164418]

>>12164404
They'll be saturated with reminders regarding correct pronouns.

[Anonymous No.12164419]

>>12164404
it will be pictures of marbel superheroes, wakamda forever!

[Anonymous No.12164421]

>>12164413
Nope, Saturn V was ludriously expensive.

[Anonymous No.12164437]

>>12164404
>its all pictures of gigachad
>the crew of all sexualities is pleased

[Anonymous No.12164438]

>>12164413
Every Saturn V was basically a unique vehicle that happened to share the same some common parts, since they were figuring out shit as they went.

It was stupid expensive.

[Anonymous No.12164442]

>>12164437
the special cornflakes will never be pleased

[Anonymous No.12164445]

>>12164438
And yet still faster to orbit than SLS.

[Anonymous No.12164458]

This is the grasshopper of starship. Final design will look straight out of a sci fi movie.

[Anonymous No.12164460]

>>12164445
That is what happens when "figuring out shit as they went" becomes untenable

[Anonymous No.12164463]

>>12164421
>>12164438

It got cheaper fast as they figured things out. The first few units came in at around $180 million apiece but SA-516 was projected to be $120 million.

The total cost of making 3 Saturn Vs a year plus the fixed cost of the production infrastructure was estimated by Boeing to be $555 million in 1967 dollars (see pic). In 2010 dollars that comes out to ~$2.8 billion a year. Compare that to how much money we spent on the shuttle:

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Kp3QJU3DWWCpYSrX7uVuUY-970-80.jpg

Every year after 1974 we spent over $3 billion on it, usually well over that. And mid-70s was the lowest NASA's budget ever got. 3 Saturn Vs a year would have therefore been easily affordable on NASA's budget throughout the 1970s.

[Anonymous No.12164491]

>>12164351
>>12164357
>>12164371
Thanks! I had only seen the first one before and thought it was the only one.

[Anonymous No.12164498]

>>12164458
are all of these external bits going to be mounted inside for the final version, and this is just the easiest way to attach them for test flights? I though the tanks go right to the skin of the vehicle so where would they fit?

[Anonymous No.12164504]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WQTCYsiS_s&feature=emb_logo Superheavy hop in late october or early november?

[Anonymous No.12164506]

>8 bar differential in ullage, 9 bar at base due to propellant head. It’s enough. Improvements in work.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1309915379041402881?s=20

[Anonymous No.12164508]

>>12164351
>>12164357
>>12164371
God damn geologists and their mandatory checklists

[Anonymous No.12164519]

>>12164506
what does this mean

[Anonymous No.12164525]

>>12164504
Probably late December or early January

[Anonymous No.12164534]

>>12163988
they must have crawled up there for warmth

[Anonymous No.12164537]

>>12164519
Previous SN7 got ~7.6. This one broke at 8 bar at the section where 301(old) and 304(new) were connected but got 9 bar at the base where it was 304. SN7.1 isn't fully 304. 8.5 bar is needed for human rated orbital safety margin. So they're pretty confident they'll get 9 bar with full 304. Also SN8 is roughly same as SN7.1 with mixed 301/304, so its not fully 304.

SN9 is next month with full 304.

more tweets @ https://twitter.com/elonmusk/with_replies

[Anonymous No.12164540]

>>12164537
That faggot who posted about it reaching 4 bar, please kys yourself faggot

[Anonymous No.12164545]

>>12164540
if they were using carbon composites it'd have already hit 900 bar

[Anonymous No.12164547]

Today in history:
>1905 – Albert Einstein publishes the third of his Annus Mirabilis papers, introducing the special theory of relativity.

[Anonymous No.12164548]

>>12164545
Bro... no

[Anonymous No.12164551]

>>12164537
Also first hop going 15 km, ~50K feet.

[Anonymous No.12164552]

>>12164498
undoubtedly
each prototype has had improved welding techniques as well, it's been getting smoother and smoother

[Anonymous No.12164553]

>>12164540
I was just the messenger

[Anonymous No.12164558]

>>12164506
This is a rocket development speedrun we are witnessing.

[Anonymous No.12164562]

>>12164558
wonder if elon is worried about political issues

[Anonymous No.12164564]

>>12164506
>Did you switch to 30X yet? Or is it still 304L?

>Mostly 304L, some 301. Broke at 301 to 304 interface. SN9 will be all 304. Also, we’re making some tweaks to the 304 alloy mixture.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1309916454616145920

I guess is this good because it means they can get better performance by just using all 304?

[Anonymous No.12164568]

>>12164562
The man has openly told the SEC to suck his cock. I think he gives zero fucks

[Anonymous No.12164573]

>>12164568
i love elon hahaha

[Anonymous No.12164580]

>>12164562
Elon told California to open up his plant or he's leaving. Their plant got reopened. And he's also leaving.

[Anonymous No.12164581]

>>12164558
What do you mean? This is how fast rocket development should be.

[Anonymous No.12164589]

>>12164568
>>12164580
pretty based

[Anonymous No.12164592]

Honestly this looks pretty good without any high tech techniques. Once all the equipment is contained and the wings are flat I don't care if it has a few dents or that you can see the welds. Just embrace the elon's junkyard & emporium aesthetic

[Anonymous No.12164594]

>>12164568
>>12164580
Literally based

[Anonymous No.12164595]

>>12164581
Don't be silly, anon. Everybody knows rocket development should take at least 10 years, especially if you're just slapping 40-year-old engines on the bottom of a 40-year-old fuel tank and sticking a 15-year-old upper stage on top of it.

[Anonymous No.12164596]

>>12164592
You dummy. The aesthetics you're describing have been established by prototypes.

[Anonymous No.12164597]

>>12164592
This is what the falcon 9 first stage looked like as they were testing it. Within a few months they had the "official" factory one flying. If Starship already looks this good I can only imagine how sexy and sleek it is going to look

[Anonymous No.12164608]

>>12164592
I love how they weigh down the stand with spare steel rolls

[Anonymous No.12164609]

>>12164592
>>12164596
Even the artistic renders have that aesthetic

[Anonymous No.12164611]

>>12164596
Mk1 looks like shit, but that's irrelevant. My point is that needing starship to look like the renders makes you kind of a bitch

[Anonymous No.12164618]

>>12164609
That looks beautiful. My point remains, each successive prototype has become cleaner and sleeker, and it's reasonable to expect that to continue.
>>12164611
Nobody said shit about a render til you chuds showed up

[Anonymous No.12164620]

>>12164609
I really don't see how these windows will work considering how flimsy and thin the nosecone is. fairing also seems super sensitive to welding

[Anonymous No.12164622]

>>12164618
>Using chud
Go back, tankie.

[Anonymous No.12164624]

>>12164620
I'm willing to bet they can the glass nose before they ever fly humans.

[Anonymous No.12164626]

>Go back, tankie.

[Anonymous No.12164627]

>>12164620
I don't think anyone expects the big windows to actually happen, unfortunately...

[Anonymous No.12164630]

>>12164618
>Nobody said shit about a render til you chuds showed up

When prototypes were super wavy with big dents unpressurized, anons were worried. Believe it or not my post wasn't talking about you, you're not that important.

[Anonymous No.12164631]

>>12164630
You quoted me.

[Anonymous No.12164633]

>>12164627
even rows of small ones doesn't seem realistic

[Anonymous No.12164634]

>>12164609
Can't wait to see something like that fly. Even better if goes orbital before SLS.

[Anonymous No.12164639]

>>12164624
idk, elon really wants it. First few most definitely won't have it but I think maybe by the 10th or so we'll start seeing it

[Anonymous No.12164643]

>>12164620
I expect starship windows to be between the impressiveness of the ISS cupola and these clearly aspirational concept windows, probably being a lot closer to the cupola. You want to break records for the largest view to space but you also don't want to die from a decades old paint chip.

[Anonymous No.12164646]

>>12164609
hmmm if you look closely, the nosecone seems to be a different steel alloy. we saw that color diff with that fairing in the windbreak too

[Anonymous No.12164651]

>>12164639
what was the reason for removing windows in dragon? nasa or spacex decision?

[Anonymous No.12164658]

>>12164631
Yes after you took my first post as a personal attack and needed it explained to you. Then I made the mistake of using a third person you in a sentence when no retard ever understands them.

[Anonymous No.12164663]

>>12164618
>chud

[Anonymous No.12164665]

>>12164658
>personal attack
You need to relax man.

[Anonymous No.12164668]

[Anonymous No.12164670]

>>12164651
nasa

[Anonymous No.12164674]

>>12164618
>>12164663
>>12164622

I am living under a rock and am very ignorant about the latest terms but what does "chud" mean?

[Anonymous No.12164678]

>>12164674
it's just zoomer shit,pay no mind

[Anonymous No.12164681]

>>12164674
communist insult meaning anyone to the right of bernie sanders

[Anonymous No.12164682]

>>12164674
I dunno desu

[Anonymous No.12164688]

>>12164609
Fuck me, she's a beaut. If I got to "own" one for myself and make cargo runs to Mars and the Moon I would do it till the day I die. Even if it just meant being the head of a skeleton crew and everything was technically still owned by SpaceX. I would name it the Spirit of Von Braun, and nickname it baton argent, or "bat" for short (because it looks like a bat). My excitement for Starship has awoken autism I didn't even know I had

[Anonymous No.12164694]

>>12164688
>Spirit of Von Braun
>Them digits
Anon, nice. Why baton argent? French for silver stick? Like how baton rouge means red stick?

[Anonymous No.12164695]

>>12164674
It's some commie acronym. I only really remember "Cannibalistic Human" or something from the first two letters. Make no effort to learn it, it's just midwit tankie plebbitors exemplifying the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

[Anonymous No.12164696]

>>12164233
>There can never be a stupider decision than killing a rocket which was already up and running

[Anonymous No.12164697]

>>12164688
Von Braun would be proud. Also based space freighter

[Anonymous No.12164699]

>>12164696
they'll do it again with oneweb

[Anonymous No.12164700]

>>12164688
Just make sure to upload regular captain's vlog entries for the rest of us to watch anon~

[Anonymous No.12164703]

>>12164269
T H I C C

[Anonymous No.12164705]

>>12164695
>>12164681
>>12164678
>>12164682

For an insult it is pretty lame and has the potential to backfire tremendously considering how close it resembles the oh so beloved word "chad".

[Anonymous No.12164706]

>>12164694
Yeah, silver stick. It does look like a bat right? I'm not the only one? Anyways, Von Braun pounded a french girl when he was stationed there so I think it serves for a fitting nickname

[Anonymous No.12164708]

>>12164674
Communist retards have put together a coalition made of all the defective, unpleasant people whose descriptions would normally be insult fodder, so they were pretty hard up for things to call their enemies. They latched on to a 1980s B movie, "Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers" as something to call their enemies. This is pants on head retarded since the people they're insulting near universally live in suburbs or the country rather than urban tunnels, but if they were smart they wouldn't be Communists. Anyone using "chud" as an insult therefore deserves whatever bad things happen to them.

[Anonymous No.12164719]

>>12164699
Why was there so much whining about UK buying OneWeb? What was the big deal?

[Anonymous No.12164728]

>>12164719
Hullo has a good video about it. Not promoting him or anything cause everyone will probably reply to me and call him a fag. All I know is that he makes good content when it comes to youtube so I suggest this as mandatory viewing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYdSdawgMrw

[Anonymous No.12164730]

>>12164705
I use it once and looked how riled up everyone is. You tell me

[Anonymous No.12164732]

>>12164730
lmao

[Anonymous No.12164734]

>>12164696
It's such a shame that they never got the chance to put keroxide to the test. It may well have flopped but the launch operations costs would have been crazy low.

[Anonymous No.12164735]

>>12164551
Even though a 15km test probably isn't notably different than a 20km test, I still feel disappointed seeing big numbers get smaller. Same thing when they downscaled from 200m to 150m hops.

[Anonymous No.12164736]

Call ne chud one more time

[Anonymous No.12164739]

>>12164674
If anyone uses it, you can ignore anything they say

[Anonymous No.12164740]

>>12164736
Chud.
>>12164739
>t. Chud

[Anonymous No.12164741]

>>12164695
It's actually from a movie, Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller. Some company buries nuclear waste underground, spawning 56% white Americans, your normal horror movie shenanigans ensue.
I have no idea at all how it became a partisan slur, but the exact nuances of communist "thinking" escape me.

[Anonymous No.12164745]

>>12164740
STOP IT ANON IM CRYING

[Anonymous No.12164748]

>>12164745
ok I'm sorry.

[Anonymous No.12164753]

Ok so like, Elon said SN8 would be done last week and now he says it will be done next week

[Anonymous No.12164758]

>>12164728
faggot

[Anonymous No.12164760]

>>12164753
>Trusting elon time

[Anonymous No.12164768]

>>12164760
my point is, if he's saying one week again for nosecone, that means two weeks. november hop confirmed?

[Anonymous No.12164771]

>>12164753
wow that's crazy you should make a thread on /r/spacex complaining about it

[Anonymous No.12164776]

>>12164753
I think it's just another one of these silicon valley strategies to compel people to work harder and longer hours.
Set a target time you know 100% you won't be able to make, then everybody is working under the added pressure of being "behind".

[Anonymous No.12164777]

>>12164771
one step ahead of you, man!

[Anonymous No.12164781]

>>12164777
B I G DIGITS HERE

[Anonymous No.12164782]

>>12164768
now that it's rolled out it won't take that long assuming nothing blows up. i'm like 80% sure a three-raptor static fire won't blow anything up.

[Anonymous No.12164783]

>>12164782
what if they pressurize the header tanks and they explode? WHAT THEN??

[Anonymous No.12164785]

>>12164753
>>12164768
No one really takes Elon's time estimates seriously anymore. The only takeaway from his estimates is that he has the company working on it and it stands a good chance of finishing sometime in the future.

[Anonymous No.12164786]

>>12164776
Exactly. Elon Musk is a slave owner and made money off of his daddy's slaves. He hates unions. Overpromises and underdelivers. Fraudsters.

[Anonymous No.12164789]

>>12164777
checked, based redditor

[Anonymous No.12164792]

>>12164783
Clean up the mess, figure out what went wrong, modify SN9, and use that.

[Anonymous No.12164794]

>>12164786
Dont care

[Anonymous No.12164799]

>>12164786
I wouldn't chose it as a strategy, but don't associate any of the retarded shit you just said with me.

[Anonymous No.12164804]

>>12164792
Wrong answer. SpaceX goes bankrupt, investors flee, Tesla stock tanks, and NASA cancels all contracts with them. It's over, faggot

[Anonymous No.12164810]

>>12164728
>Not promoting him or anything cause everyone will probably reply to me and call him a fag.

This is what I hate about modern 4chan. Everyone is afraid to direct people to offsite content out of fear of being perceived as a shill or enemy faction member in some faggot meme war. Anons will take pause from their pepe and wojack posting and say mean things to you, oh fucking no. Stop being a pussy.

Watch this post while I leave and take a shit. When I get back nothing of consequence will have happened.

https://www.youtube.com/c/EverydayAstronaut/videos

[Anonymous No.12164818]

>>12164277
>>12164284
>>12164291
you guys do realize that SSTO is impossible, especially with hydrogen?

[Anonymous No.12164820]

>>12164804
>tfw when it's over
>mfw when it's over
post your face yfw it's over

[Anonymous No.12164824]

>>12164810
Wow every day estrogen huh? ONIONS ONIONS ONIONS CRINGE CRIMGE CRUNGE

[Anonymous No.12164829]

>>12164810
Alright you fucking cocksucking crambone, have you considered the fact that I preemptively placed that because the last three times I linked to scott manley I got 20 replies calling him a faggot and getting off-topic bringing up his twitter politics? I added that because I wanted the anon to watch the video without the distraction of everyone derailing and bringing up social media politics. Go suck a dick and chase it down with a concoction of bleach and ammonia you absolute fucking god complex nigger

[Anonymous No.12164830]

>>12164818
It's not impossible, just wildly impractical

[Anonymous No.12164831]

>>12164820
It's never over. Don't let the depressing gravity of the cradle keep you down.

[Anonymous No.12164837]

>>12164829
Looks like I was wrong, the consequence was you got assblasted lmao

[Anonymous No.12164838]

>>12164810
Go back to r eadit you ultima fagule. You are scum, and you watch gaaay homo content. I hope your feelings have been hurt, I know mine are.

KYS your YS self CHUD

[Anonymous No.12164842]

>>12164829
I....anon

[Anonymous No.12164849]

>>12164829
i would wager that i'm probably further right than anyone calling you a faggot and i'm never going to have an issue with hullo videos because he's enough of an adult to keep politics out of them and there's never been anyone else on his level when it comes to content

[Anonymous No.12164851]

>>12164728
>>12164810
>>12164829
Holy cringe man what an unbased set of posts.

[Anonymous No.12164853]

why dont we have 4STO vehicles? what's so hard about adding more stages? like, just stack it nigga, lmao. Not hard

[Anonymous No.12164858]

>>12164696
>killing your entire space program as soon as you get it up and running

[Anonymous No.12164873]

>>12164804
>And then Shelby woke up

[Anonymous No.12164874]

>>12164853
Make more engines and drop them into ocean

[Anonymous No.12164875]

>>12164853
Diminishing returns.

[Anonymous No.12164880]

>>12164853
we do have them!

[Anonymous No.12164884]

>>12164340
In space your limp dick would still point forward, wouldn't it?
>>12164344
>60 times a year
Well they missed that mark a bit, didn't they?
>>12164351
would traverse
>>12164371
>drive tube
>saddlebags
>>12164498
See that bit right at the base of the flaps? That's also a raceway for the external plumbing.
>>12164506
>>12164537
>Broke at 301 to 304 interface.
Interdasting.

[Anonymous No.12164885]

>>12164875
based on what, spreadsheets? gtfoutta heeeaah

[Anonymous No.12164890]

>>12164880
wooah buddhabased, ty fir sharimg

[Anonymous No.12164901]

why everyone spend much money on big rocket lol? rocket use only once

if i was ceo of nasa i would build tall building and get into space with elvator

▲
▲▲

[Anonymous No.12164906]

>>12164901
p.s. i post tried force so u know i am "oldfag" and know i know much of space

[Anonymous No.12164908]

>>12164901
tell me more, this is inspiring

[Anonymous No.12164928]

>>12164908
i heard from friend that rocket shot in space cost 1 million dollar

big tower cost more than 1 million dollar but u can use again for not million dollar! only 1 dollar

i think tower should go all the way to america so it is useful for explore

[Anonymous No.12164934]

>>12164908
>Nasa holds big HLS event
>Jeff Bezos walks onto the stage
>"Blue Origin is cancelled"
>gasps from the croud
>"henceforth I am investing 200 billion dollars in the first ever space elevator"
>crowd explodes in cheering
>everyone loves Jeff again
>"one last thing," said Bezos
>"Black Lives Matter!"
>crowd goes ABSOLUTELY fucking wild
>Jeff "The Last Hero" Bezos
>legacy sealed
I can see it now

[Anonymous No.12164935]

>>12164901
You am play gods.
Grug think if gods want grugs go into space, he would give grugs wings. Grug say, if pile rocks into space to climb, what happen when run out of rocks hmm? Where make club to hit woman and other grugs?

[Anonymous No.12164942]

>>12164934
Ouch yeah this is within the realm of possibility, not gonna lie

[Anonymous No.12164943]

>>12164928
wow, i never knew this. i believe this could really work. truly insightful, sir thank you

[Anonymous No.12164952]

>>12164935
shut fuck up grug u ballsack face

if it not allowed for us into space then we would not into space

[Anonymous No.12164956]

>>12164943
thank u mr bento

pls give 100 bagoolian moneys for reward for big idea

[Anonymous No.12164972]

>>12164934
>"henceforth I am investing 200 billion dollars in the first ever space elevator"
20 years later not a single excavation has been made, but they have an empty factory

[Anonymous No.12164984]

>>12164956
of course, i shall provide 1 billion per year for 200 years. indeed, your dream is made real. this will change the way the future is. this is a game changer

[Anonymous No.12164995]

>>12163888
>The explosions are pretty modest right?
not at all... they're pretty dangerous

[Anonymous No.12164999]

>>12164984
thank

[Anonymous No.12165000]

>>12164002
I think they will pressure test it without cone on the 29th

[Anonymous No.12165003]

>>12164935
many rock in space grug, land run out of rock soon, we must go space find more rock

[Anonymous No.12165014]

>>12164972
I loved that video they posted months back of their mission control, complete with blue LEDs, gaming monitors, etc. All I could think was "the hell do they need all that for?"

Then I remembered Amazon has investments in Esports

[Anonymous No.12165017]

[Anonymous No.12165020]

>>12164154
look at the old SN1 with all these gay patches randomly assembled.
SN8 is really its evolution.

[Anonymous No.12165023]

>>12165017
>THEY KNEW, THOSE DAMN STINKY PAJEETS

[Anonymous No.12165026]

>>12164334
well they didn't do an actual flight test yet

[Anonymous No.12165027]

>>12164597
The "official factory" v1.0 didn't look quite as streamlined and sleek as Block 5 does today though. It looked rather lumpy and weird.
But it worked.

[Anonymous No.12165030]

>>12165017
life imitates art

[Anonymous No.12165032]

>>12164622
They wish they could go back, but reddit actually banned their little hugbox.

[Anonymous No.12165033]

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-invites-media-to-hot-fire-test-for-mega-rocket-to-support-moon-missions
if your child has an interest in journalism they may one day late in their career be invited to the hot fire test of the sls rocket. how exciting is that!

[Anonymous No.12165035]

>>12165026
You think their might be some flap changes based on performance? oh man, I can't wait to see what the full stack looks like when it matures in a decade or so

Think of how badass Falcon 9 looks now compared to the goofy first iteration. And Starship is already badass

[Anonymous No.12165038]

>>12164741
>I have no idea at all how it became a partisan slur
It was referenced in Clerks 2 and ChapoTrapHouse thought it was hilarious to call stereotypical "basement dwellers" chuds.
Did you really think any of them have seen the movie?

[Anonymous No.12165040]

>>12165033
mmmm roasted babies

[Anonymous No.12165042]

>>12165033
>it's gonna blow up
>and all the media will see

[Anonymous No.12165049]

>>12165033
did the first shuttle ever do a full duration test firing? what about saturn v?

[Anonymous No.12165052]

>>12165042
a day to remember on /sfg/.
>orange rocket go boom

[Anonymous No.12165063]

>>12164785
Well, still better than whatever Boeing is doing.
That is if they are doing anything at all at the moment.

[Anonymous No.12165066]

>>12163888
>Explosion
>Modest
There's no such thing as a modest explosion with a tank the size of a small skyscraper

[Anonymous No.12165069]

>>12165049
Fuck I wish I knew the answer for sure, but as far as I know they just connected to engines to a test stand and fed them fuel for 8 minutes straight

[Anonymous No.12165083]

>>12165066
Maybe, but I was asking about liquid nitrogen at literally espresso brewing pressures

Rewatched SN1 and it launched the top bulkhead so apparently I don't know shit about coffee

[Anonymous No.12165091]

Will a 107 expansion ratio really get us to the clouds of Venus

[Anonymous No.12165095]

>>12165049
I think the space shuttle did a test fire on the launchpad with all of the engines attaches, but they only ignited the SSMEs, which was directly before sts-1

[Anonymous No.12165101]

>>12165095
>>12165049

every orbiter did a static fire on the pad before its first launch

[Anonymous No.12165104]

>>12165049
Full duration test fires are part of NASA's certification processes, and they test fired all of the Saturn stages on the ground. The J-2s have a very low expansion ratio so it wasn't challenging. They did blow up an S-II stage during one of the test fires.

[Anonymous No.12165127]

>Yes, the flaps are now directly driven by electric motors with a gearbox! No more hydraulics.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1309943983733272576

[Anonymous No.12165129]

>>12165127
epic epic epic epic

[Anonymous No.12165130]

>>12165127
I thought this was confirmed a long time ago. Hydraulics are heavy as fuck. Might as well just add a tesla battery to each flap because the batteries keep getting better and more reliable each year

[Anonymous No.12165137]

>>12165127
This brings to mind, has there been discussion on hydraulic vs. electrics for other components like the legs? An F9 had to ditch once due to hydraulic failure.

[Anonymous No.12165144]

Armadillo Aerospace revival when???

[Anonymous No.12165146]

>>12165144

[Anonymous No.12165152]

>>12165144
is propellant stored in the balls?

[Anonymous No.12165154]

>>12165144
>>12165146
They were a promising platform for Moon robotic missions. Unfortunate NASA never did anything with it.

[Anonymous No.12165159]

>>12165144
Carmack should have named it UAC.

[Anonymous No.12165160]

Thought you guys would like this: https://files.catbox.moe/tv68gi.mp4

It has sound so I can't post here.

[Anonymous No.12165161]

>>12165130
>we'll move to electric motors later
vs
>THIS ONE IS ELECTRIC MOTORS

Don't confuse the two.

[Anonymous No.12165162]

>>12165144
4ASS has a better chance of coming together than reviving Armadillo Aerospace.

[Anonymous No.12165164]

>>12165127
Can hydraulics even be used in space.

[Anonymous No.12165165]

>>12165152
all four of them 8^)

[Anonymous No.12165166]

>>12165154
I mean I'm pretty sure it was the first time NASA actually "flew" a methalox engine, and they tested a bunch of AI landing software. But what's weird is they tested it at Johnson space center; god knows why. They don't really test things at JSC. I think it was just a bunch of bored engineers who had extra funding to try something fun

[Anonymous No.12165167]

>>12165144
daily reminder that Armadillo supplied Rocket Racing League with engines and Jim Bridenstine owned a RRL team

[Anonymous No.12165174]

>>12165167
>A first-grader named Jim Bridenstine once drew a Crayola picture of himself smiling big and wide next to an airplane cast all in red. Then, as best as he could, the boy wrote "I want to be a pieolet."
Based from the very start

[Anonymous No.12165175]

>>12165160
I don't know if I should like it, does reddit have anything to do with it?

[Anonymous No.12165184]

>>12165175
I got it on the IRC channel of an obscure tech chan.

[Anonymous No.12165186]

>>12164810
faggot

[Anonymous No.12165189]

>>12164777
Idek what i'll do when he's gone bros

[Anonymous No.12165190]

>>12165014
link?

[Anonymous No.12165199]

>>12165189
maybe he'll go on a bunch of podcasts and he can tell us all the dirty details behind the scenes at nasa, no filter epic style

cheer up old chum

[Anonymous No.12165202]

>>12165190
https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1237725784745230336?lang=en

https://venturebeat.com/2017/03/12/the-curious-case-of-amazons-deep-plunge-into-the-esports-industry/

[Anonymous No.12165203]

>>12165189
Jim and Elon team up to take over Mars. Where else would Jim go after NASA?

[Anonymous No.12165204]

>>12165083
Yeah that would be some extreme coffee

[Anonymous No.12165210]

>>12165199
he's young enough that the smart play is to take a few jobs on some aerospace corporate boards and wait to see if something opens back up at nasa. if he dishes out the dirt now all those doors close.

[Anonymous No.12165217]

>>12165210
true true, i'm just being retarded out loud

[Anonymous No.12165220]

>A second electric heating phase takes place in the engine using high
discharge LiPo batteries, the same type of batteries used by ARCA to power the cutting-edge ArcaBoard. Even for our team an inherent question arose: how can we use a rocket that offers only around 50 - 60 seconds of specific impulse? Because this by itself can’t give the necessary performance for an orbital flight, and not even for a suborbital flight. We were literally struggling to find an option to work with a rocket with such low performance. Because when you look at current rockets and see specific impulses that are around
four times higher, the first instinctual reaction is to quit the idea thinking: this isn’t going to work. But the tremendous advantages offered by the water in terms of cost, safety and lack of pollution was what kept us pushing and come back to it over and over again, to find an option to work with this system

Based romanians.

[Anonymous No.12165223]

>>12165220
Dirt has better ISP than water, have they tried that?

[Anonymous No.12165225]

>>12165220
If they weren't a gypsy scam they'd have moved to 500psi+ dry steam. The pressures the last generation of naval boilers could reach was kinda crazy.

[Anonymous No.12165233]

How easy is it to robustly code the computer for a homemade hopper rocket?

pic semirelated

[Anonymous No.12165238]

>>12165233
>computer
just use a gyroscope to keep it upright and hope the wind doesn't make off with it

[Anonymous No.12165246]

>>12165233
>robustly
define this

[Anonymous No.12165248]

>>12165246
better than MCAS

[Anonymous No.12165251]

>>12165233
>code
no

[Anonymous No.12165255]

>>12165233
There was a guy on YouTube who was working on a replica F9 model rocket that could deploy landing legs and land. His tests were pretty close to sticking the landing.

[Anonymous No.12165257]

>>12165248

[Anonymous No.12165301]

>>12165248
If you are not going to leave the atmosphere you probably don't need redundancy(as in 2of3 result checking). ECC memory could be useful nevertheless but you are not going to find anything cheap that uses it.
My final answer is to use a raspberry pi and focus on the programming language.
Desirable characteristics:
1. Strongly and statically typed so the compiler catches as much errors as possible;
2. Test driven development;
3. No garbage collection, it adds unpredictability and is very bad for control systems.

The most common choice is C++, but it has a lot of perks you can step on.
If you don't already know how to program you could try using python and following the test driven approach. It fails at 1 and 3 but is a very beginner friendly language and has a strong robotics community.

Rust fills 1, 2 and 3 but it is a relatively new language with few learning resources. It does have a very active community.

[Anonymous No.12165303]

>>12164934
what do you think about the claims from that japanese company that can build a space elevator by 2050?

[Anonymous No.12165307]

>>12165301
There are companies working on aerospace Rust but it's not done yet,

[Anonymous No.12165309]

>>12165303
they are bullshitters, obviously

[Anonymous No.12165317]

>>12165303
Talk is cheap.

[Anonymous No.12165323]

>>12165307
she said it is for a hobby project
>>12165303
it is hiro trying to get more traffic to /sfg/

[Anonymous No.12165324]

>>12165303
What company is it, Softbank? That sounds like something the Softbank dude would say. He's fucking nuts.

[Anonymous No.12165530]

>>12164545
...right before the oxygen decides that the carbon looks really sexy tonight and goes BOOM

[Anonymous No.12165547]

Orange you glad we're not cancelled yet?

[Anonymous No.12165578]

>>12165146
Well there's your problem m8.

[Anonymous No.12165618]

>>12165303
Why build a space elevator when you can build a launch loop for far less investment and with modern day materials?

[Anonymous No.12165624]

>>12165547
I can't believe they built their test platform on a jedi temple as their monument to greed

[Anonymous No.12165637]

>>12165144
man these nonsense tiny little landers were the only thing happening in spaceflight for so long
>hurr durr in 20 years these will eventually be able to land payloads on the moon
the darkest of times

[Anonymous No.12165682]

>>12164853
PSLV as mentioned, also Proton-Briz, Scout, Minotaur, Taurus, Vega with its kickstage, and Long March 11 and the other all-solid chinese rockets. Basically, the lower ISP your stages (solid or hypergolic fuels), the more stages you have to have.

Scout even had a FIVE stage option, as does Minotaur V and VI, used for small lunar sats.

[Anonymous No.12165687]

20STO steam rockets when?

[Anonymous No.12165698]

>>12165637
It still blows my mind how the US wasted FIFTY FUCKING YEARS on low orbit plus babby probes by canceling the Saturn V.

[Anonymous No.12165730]

>>12165687
You could get away with way fewer stages if you used a nuclear reactor to boil the water. Get it up to something fun like 100 bar and shoot it out an aerospike.

[Anonymous No.12165743]

>>12165687
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dz4vuWCpfA0

[Anonymous No.12165748]

>>12165743
why can'tnot we cannot do this in reality? (IRL)

[Anonymous No.12165764]

>>12165748
Because launching to Earth orbit takes 3x as much delta v as launching into Kerbin orbit.

[Anonymous No.12165765]

>>12165730
>aerospike water NTR
>use the water to catch neutrons
This is just retarded enough to work.

[Anonymous No.12165767]

>>12165764
just use more decouplers

[Anonymous No.12165777]

>>12165698
i know spaceflight guys like to peg nixon for this, but you gotta understand what nasa was peddling with the shuttle. they truly had everyone convinced it would dramatically reduce the cost of spacelight while also catering to the us air forces/government needs.
imagine whats being promised with starship now only to find out 15 years later that the thing was an overexpensive deathtrap. thats the shuttle

[Anonymous No.12165795]

>>12165777
>they truly had everyone convinced
The were just as convinced themselves.

[Anonymous No.12165803]

>>12162394
migrate

[Anonymous No.12165814]

>>12165765
because it's not actually that retarded it's just a tea kettle rocket, if you have lots of fuel (say, you're mining ice in space) and a reactor on board anyways, it's a perfectly sensible thruster for RCS duty or even main propulsion