/sfg/ Spaceflight General

[Anonymous No.12202398]

Titanic Big G Edition

UPDATES;
• Scrubtober no more! A Falcon 9 Starlink mission has launched from KSC.
• SLS green run checks off another box. Remaining steps are propellant cryo load/flush and full duration static fire.
• Cygnus docks at ISS, providing fresh fruit and the latest issues of Shonen Jump to the astronauts.
• KSP continues to be a horrific buggy mess.

[Anonymous No.12202404]

>>12202395
>from an alt history timeline where we got a flyback s-ic + s-ivb with an optional glider shuttle on top of it
Fuck, I think I like that idea even more than Eyes Turned Skyward.

[Anonymous No.12202408]

[Anonymous No.12202410]

First for orbital dicc

[Anonymous No.12202412]

More SN8 testing tonight

[Anonymous No.12202418]

First for previous thread: >>12202404
and

the CIIIIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRRRRCLE OF LIIIIIIIIIIFE

[Anonymous No.12202424]

Second for previous thread: >>12198491

and

the CIRRRRRRRRRRRRCLE OF LIIIIIIIIFE

[Anonymous No.12202429]

>>12202410
It's refreshing that there's non-hypothetical work being done on fusion rocketry.

[Anonymous No.12202431]

was it realistically the best option for a shuttle?

[Anonymous No.12202432]

Are you ready for the 15th?

[Anonymous No.12202439]

>>12202432
[doubt]

[Anonymous No.12202441]

>>12202432
>same day as the next debate


aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[Anonymous No.12202442]

>>12202431
Yes. Literally yes. I don't even have evidence or proof or anything but holy shit- for the 1970's before modern computers THIS would have been kino.

[Anonymous No.12202444]

>>12202404
It's more optimistic than ETS overall with things developing quicker (and maybe not quite realistically, we're talking like Falcon 9 $/kg in the 1980s). Plus the Soviets have an actual good shuttle design to copy off of.

>>12202432
SCRUBTOBER IS BACK ON THE MENU BOYS

[Anonymous No.12202449]

>>12202442
It feels like it would have been so much simpler than Shuttle, no SRB's, 100% reusability, potentially more dV for the Orbiter in space too, rescue missions would be much more simplified, they could even have one on standby on every mission ready at a moments notice if needed

[Anonymous No.12202464]

ASS TO ASS UwU

[Anonymous No.12202470]

>>12202449
also the usual advantages of horizontal launch - any inclination from any airport

[Anonymous No.12202481]

>>12202470
>>12202431
imagine strapping SRB's to the bottom craft (unmanned) to propel it alone into orbit to function as a wet-workshop for the visiting craft, thats one huge makeshift station

[Anonymous No.12202482]

>>12202442
>>12202449
The booster would have had ~9 SSMEs that would have needed even more time for refurbishment between launches, it would have needed to be a hypersonic aircraft more capable than any ever built, and it would still be dropping ice and insulation onto the orbiter during launch. And the straight-wing orbiter design was dropped because the edges of the wings got too hot.

I want to believe but at the same time I can't.

[Anonymous No.12202486]

New Neopork renders

[Anonymous No.12202489]

>>12202424

[Anonymous No.12202490]

>>12202482
>and it would still be dropping ice and insulation onto the orbiter during launch

How? I thought it wasn't a vertical launch, the orbiter is on top so how would ice/insulation fall up onto it in horizontal flight?

[Anonymous No.12202491]

>>12202432
five scrubs, one explosion

[Anonymous No.12202493]

>>12202489
this launch was kino

[Anonymous No.12202494]

>>12202486

[Anonymous No.12202495]

i hate that fucker from "what about it" hes a piece of shit, obviously an useless retard who is terrified hell ever have to do real work at any time.

also, he exploits american workers, he says "my renderers" "my team"

he DOESNT PAY THEM, he FUCKING EXPLOITS THEM, whos this nazi krauts fucker think he is

[Anonymous No.12202505]

>>12202490
That's from a North American design and it was supposed to be vertically launched. I'm not sure what's going on in the picture. Maybe they were stacked horizontally before being rolled out to the pad and flipped?

[Anonymous No.12202508]

>>12202481
There were proposals to just carry the external tank all the way to orbit for a similar purpose. I'm still pissed nobody seriously pursued that.

[Anonymous No.12202517]

>>12202505
wow all this time I thought it was horizontal all the way up

[Anonymous No.12202520]

ummm...

[Anonymous No.12202522]

>>12202486
>>12202494
Legs still look weird but still sexy regardless.

[Anonymous No.12202523]

>>12202395
This is cool, thanks for sharing fren

[Anonymous No.12202524]

uhhhhhh

[Anonymous No.12202527]

>>12202517
There were several similar designs from the early-mid-60s that were sled-launched (the spaceplane from 2001 a space odyssey was one of these) but it got dropped by the time NASA started sending out serious shuttle design contracts for whatever reason.

[Anonymous No.12202529]

I wish there was an updated render of Starship at the Richard Shelby Memorial Station

[Anonymous No.12202532]

welp.

[Anonymous No.12202534]

>>12202529
*Richard Shelby Memorial Propellant Depot

[Anonymous No.12202539]

Why is the dream chaser the best?

[Anonymous No.12202541]

>>12202532
>>12202524
>>12202520
>>12202493
Holy shit is that real? How did it get that big?

[Anonymous No.12202542]

>>12202539
At what?

[Anonymous No.12202549]

>>12202532
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJTJlieo6gk

[Anonymous No.12202557]

>>12202542
Aesthetics, and I agree

>>12202539
Space Orca

[Anonymous No.12202558]

>>12202539
Similar to how nature evolved the crabs body plan multiple times, the dreamchasers aerodynamic shape is good that it has been attempted 4 separate times

[Anonymous No.12202563]

SNC have so much potential

[Anonymous No.12202565]

>>12202486
I have no idea what but Elon's going to insist on a better-looking decal for the SpaceX logo than that in the final product.

[Anonymous No.12202566]

>>12202563
Why then have nasa been dicking them over so bad?

[Anonymous No.12202570]

>>12202557
It is cute at least. I want to pet it

[Anonymous No.12202577]

>>12202565
I believe SS is getting the cybertruck treatment, no branding or ornamentation. It speaks for itself.

[Anonymous No.12202581]

>>12202431
I want starship to have that cockpit so bad. You really don't feel the scale without it.

[Anonymous No.12202588]

>>12202577
Probably. Both are very unique designs that others fear copying/making.

[Anonymous No.12202593]

>>12202565
Calling it now, they are going to paint tiles white to make an X on the heat shield

[Anonymous No.12202594]

>>12202577
>>12202588
something like this would really pop though, if you stuck it where it wouldn't get roasted by plasma

[Anonymous No.12202600]

>>12202563
>thousands of years of basket weaving finally paid off

[Anonymous No.12202607]

That /tv/ challenger thread makes me want to commit sudoku

[Anonymous No.12202608]

[Anonymous No.12202613]

Whats the status of reactionless drives? Still a big meme? Or is there anything out there that has a chance?

[Anonymous No.12202614]

>>12202608
this really activates my neutrons

[Anonymous No.12202616]

>>12202613
photon loop emdrives are the last remaining possibility for now

[Anonymous No.12202617]

>>12202608
dangerously based

[Anonymous No.12202622]

>>12202608
>i feel a burning sensation

[Anonymous No.12202627]

>>12202608
Dyson's dream finally realized, brings tears to my eyes.

[Anonymous No.12202641]

>>12202607
Based fellow /tv/-chad

[Anonymous No.12202646]

>>12202494
>>12202486
There is no way these tiny stump legs are going to be in any kind of actual flying design, that shit will tip over so easily. They need a really wide stance on them like Falcon 9 has.

[Anonymous No.12202650]

>>12202646
they're wider than the falcon 9 stance is already

[Anonymous No.12202656]

>>12202646
depiction is clearly representing a finalized SN8, not the actual final SS (which would have tiles, windows, and not have exposed wires and piping at the very least). final is supposed to have a wider stance and tolerance for uneven terrain, so a step beyond F9

[Anonymous No.12202657]

Why are X planes so satisfying bros

[Anonymous No.12202658]

>>12202646
center of mass yo

[Anonymous No.12202665]

>>12202650
But this vehicle is proportionally bigger than Falcon 9

>>12202656
Yeah I thought that might be the case

>>12202658
Falcon 9 has a low centre of mass too and yet still needs a massive stance

[Anonymous No.12202685]

>>12202665
Falcon 9 also lands in a boat which is constantly tipping from side to side and up and down. It needs a lot more stability than Superheavy which I believe is meant to land on a stable sea platform based on existing oil rig designs.

[Anonymous No.12202693]

>>12202685
Starship is supposed to land in lunar/martian regolith.

[Anonymous No.12202694]

>>12202693
Mars isn't known for moving around much

[Anonymous No.12202695]

>>12202489
>>12202493
it looked nothing like this on the live stream tho, it was just a normal day. why did they add a piss filter to all the pics?

[Anonymous No.12202697]

>>12202694
but it is known for not being perfectly flat

[Anonymous No.12202703]

>>12202697
unlike the earth

[Anonymous No.12202706]

>>12202697
Just land on a flat bit bro

[Anonymous No.12202711]

>>12202697
Starship legs will be self-leveling by the time they're landing them on Mars/Moon.

[Anonymous No.12202714]

>>12202697
I myself prefer flatter planets if you know what I mean

[Anonymous No.12202715]

>>12202695
>it looked nothing like this on the live stream tho, it was just a normal day. why did they add a piss filter to all the pics?

Because its Schlieren photography against the sun, which allows you to capture the distortions in the air.

[Anonymous No.12202720]

>>12202695
They were taking pictures through the airlock.

[Anonymous No.12202721]

If Mars has water, where are the salt flats? Just land on those.

[Anonymous No.12202724]

>>12202489
New phone background tiem

[Anonymous No.12202728]

>>12202432
>falcon, delta, and new shepard delayed by multiple weeks
brutal

[Anonymous No.12202734]

>>12202721
Nigga it's all salt flats.

[Anonymous No.12202735]

>>12202432
>launch
>RUD
>scrub
>scrub
>scrub
>scrub

[Anonymous No.12202746]

>>12202593
Is that ablative shielding? Didn't they want to use steel/liquid methane instead?

[Anonymous No.12202753]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu0aYuF-y9E&feature=emb_title

I guess 3D printing is the future but man all the habitats look like dogshit.

[Anonymous No.12202755]

>spacex
>space sex
what did musker mean by this?

[Anonymous No.12202757]

>>12202563
I think they're making the engines for the Dynetics HLS.

[Anonymous No.12202760]

>>12202746
that was abandoned very early on anon

[Anonymous No.12202765]

>>12202697
They aren't going to use the crush core legs on the final vehicle though, they will be actuated in some way to allow for autoleveling.

[Anonymous No.12202771]

>>12202753
In reality you will just print domes. All these dumb designs have the smell of architecture students.

[Anonymous No.12202774]

>>12202746
TUFROC thermal tiles, no ablation. Sturdy and bolted on. It may still fail but nobody can say that the lessons of the shuttle haven't been learned.

[Anonymous No.12202784]

>>12202746
That's on the back burner (haha) but yes currently they're using thermal tiles, although as >>12202774 points out they aren't really ablative. I mean I assume constant reflights will eventually wear them out, but they aren't designed to burn off to provide cooling like ablative heat shields are.

[Anonymous No.12202793]

>>12202784
I guess since Starship is stainless steel one or more tiles failing doesn't automatically cause a RUD

[Anonymous No.12202795]

>>12202793
the whole vehicle is like that metal panel that saved that one space shuttle when a tile fell off.

[Anonymous No.12202815]

>>12202665
>But this vehicle is proportionally bigger than Falcon 9

Speaking of proportions, starship is way shorter than it is wide compared to the falcon 9. Maybe superheavy needs big legs though.

[Anonymous No.12202823]

>>12202793
Yes, although honestly I'd still coat the ventral hull in the carbon-carbon paint they use for Falcon 9 as a bit of extra protection, Starship's whole lower half is one giant pressure vessel and while it will be mostly depleted by reentry time you wouldn't want prolonged heating to weaken any one spot. As with the Shuttle though, the parts which will be subjected to peak heat will be the wing roots and nose, I'd imagine the tiles there will be the thickest, the larges, and the most customized, while most of the rest will be the standard hexagonal tiles we've already seen. They'll all be much more strongly affixed to the hull though compared to the shuttle, the chances of losing a whole tile will be very low once everything is finalized, at least in theory.
>>12202815
They did recently say they're moving to four even wider, larger legs for Superheavy, as opposed to the previous six smaller stumpier legs.

[Anonymous No.12202824]

>>12202771
This. The very reason we all scorned the proontbro was because the designs seriously REEKED of metrofaggotry. I for one would like to see dirt domes being proonted over buried inflatables.

[Anonymous No.12202836]

>>12202774
Even if we end up with ablation as long as the tiles last a lot of flights I wont consider starship a letdown. The idea that a rocket can be anything like a passenger jet with 30 years of service is a pipe dream right now.

What I don't want to see is anal inspections on every tile between every flight. If you lose a tile it goes from being a crew starship to a cargo starship, who cares.

[Anonymous No.12202859]

>>12202824
>ladders
um sorry sweety but that's not ADA compliant

[Anonymous No.12202862]

>>12202859
>Elon replies back "feel free to serve the complaint on Mars"

[Anonymous No.12202864]

>>12202859
top kek

[Anonymous No.12202877]

>>12202859
It would be in 0.3g

[Anonymous No.12202879]

>>12202563
I am rooting for them and Dynetics. More so sierra nevada. Talk about staying in the game despite getting a constant shaft. Their dumb little trunk section for dreamchaser is an attempt to stay alive when nasa is trying their best to kill them off and divert all money to boeing(!)

[Anonymous No.12202882]

>>12202879
>Their dumb little trunk section for dreamchaser is an attempt to stay alive
Isn’t the Space Force buying some as long term orbital test platforms or something?

[Anonymous No.12202885]

>>12202882
Yeah. For a "space station" (i.e. an attachment hub for cubesats. it's dumb). Dreamchaser was originally slotted for commercial crew but got downgraded or something and now its only doing cargo runs afaik so they added the trunk section to make it more appealing

[Anonymous No.12202886]

>>12202563
That's a big inflatable

[Anonymous No.12202887]

>>12202882
whats wrong with the x37

[Anonymous No.12202890]

>>12202879
Actually, in this market, Sierra Nevada should do an IPO. It would get way overbought like TSLA or SPCE, and unlike SPCE they actually have an orbital vehicle.

[Anonymous No.12202891]

>>12202563
>>12202886
Wait what they're doing inflatables now?! Where does dreamchaser attach? If sierra nevada has taken the inflatipill then I am really pumped

[Anonymous No.12202895]

>>12202824
You’d still want prefab regolith-concrete tunnels/sections to expand your outpost as the population grows. That way you can use Martian concrete in ways people can easily make and understand loads on it without meme technology
The whole thing will become honeycombed

[Anonymous No.12202896]

What are they testing on SN8? Another cryo test like last night? Raptor installation when?

[Anonymous No.12202902]

>>12202886
For you

[Anonymous No.12202918]

https://mobile.twitter.com/Global_Mil_Info/status/1313554875133947909

TAPE OUTGASSING SRBS ARE REAL

[Anonymous No.12202919]

Kek why does it have a security camera on the top? Either way this is sexy sexy

[Anonymous No.12202923]

>>12202919
Uh I should reiterate that idk if this is the trunk section or the inflatable hab. I believe this is the trunk section

[Anonymous No.12202935]

>>12202919
>why does it have a security camera on the top
Logistics flights to the station have been conspicuously lacking food ever since DM-2 landed. They’re hoping to catch Bob in the act, or at the very least, deter him.

[Anonymous No.12202937]

>>12202887
it's a military test vehicle classified out the wazoo, they need some less spooky options

[Anonymous No.12202941]

>>12202918
KEK

[Anonymous No.12203020]

This is India’s reusable rocket. Say something nice about it.

[Anonymous No.12203043]

>>12203020
Like any piece of Indian engineering it's not real until after it's deployed, and probably not right after.

[Anonymous No.12203055]

What's the rocket scientist's equivalent of "It isn't rocket science" idiom?

[Anonymous No.12203064]

>>12203055
it isn't designing a functional ssto

[Anonymous No.12203069]

>>12203055
It isn't socializing or voting conservative lmao

[Anonymous No.12203071]

>STILL no good options for procedural solid rockets

[Anonymous No.12203073]

>>12203071
How the fuck is there not an option to just add more segments to SRB's in vanilla

[Anonymous No.12203074]

>>12203071
there is, it's called IRL

[Anonymous No.12203101]

I recently saw an article claiming europe is gonna challenge spacex
ESA has never had a manned vehicle, why do they think they'll even be able to keep up at all? Starship is gonna blow anything they make to compete with falcon 9 out of the water

[Anonymous No.12203106]

IT POPPED OMG

[Anonymous No.12203117]

>>12203101
Anon the french will catch up... they have to nap first just give them a decade or five

[Anonymous No.12203160]

>>12202431
yes, dolphin sex would have at least taught us something about first stage reuse and hypersonic rocketplanes that are actually supposed to do something

[Anonymous No.12203169]

>>12202891
They took over the tech from Bigelow.

[Anonymous No.12203173]

>>12203020
they have chosen the correct number of stages to orbit
also, hypersonic glider first stages are my fetish

[Anonymous No.12203189]

Chilly
>>12203169
Wait what... has this been confirmed? Like they got the patents and everything? If so that's fucking awesome- I did not know this.

[Anonymous No.12203203]

how the FUCK do they power rovers with shitty fucking solar panels what the fuck bros

[Anonymous No.12203206]

>>12203203
Slide rulers and a magic touch from test pilots honestly

[Anonymous No.12203210]

>>12203203
Curiosity and Perseverance have RTG

[Anonymous No.12203214]

>>12203189
inflatable tech isn't controlled, anon
you don't need to buy the technology from that fucking nutcase

[Anonymous No.12203217]

I get why small bells don't work as well in space, but why don't space bells work fine not in space?

[Anonymous No.12203218]

>>12202608
Progressives don't want this future

[Anonymous No.12203219]

>>12203203
>>12203210
>irratiates the landing zone if it crashes
Nothing personnel.

[Anonymous No.12203220]

>>12203217
Your exhaust overexpands and you don't get enough thrust. The RVac static fire showed what that looks like.

[Anonymous No.12203222]

>>12203203
bigger solar panels, lots of sitting around, low power modes
>>12203217
the idea is to match the pressure of your exhaust with the pressure of your environment
in space, this is zero so you just make your bell as big as possible until diminishing returns where you aren't getting much out of it because there's very little pressure (and thus force) left in the system
in not space when you make it too low the atmosphere climbs up the inside of your bell nozzle in an uneven fashion and then it goes kablooey
if it doesn't do that but you're still overexpanded, there's less force on the inside of the bell nozzle (expanded out to lower pressure than ambient) than force on the outside of the bell nozzle

[Anonymous No.12203223]

>>12203214
It was my understanding that some company (idk who) had a contract and got a bunch of data with nasa, then bigelow bought that company or the rights to it, and now they are basically defunct but still hold certain "rights"

[Anonymous No.12203224]

>>12203223
no, Bigelow made a big marketing stink about NASA sharing their research on expandohabs with him
it appears to have worked on you because you think NASA patents aren't open for everybody

[Anonymous No.12203228]

>>12203224
I considered that before posting lmao. Yeah it would make sense most things studied by NASA would have to be open for all considering its government funded. I love inflatables and sierra's mockup looks good

[Anonymous No.12203232]

>>12203228
I hope that's how it works too lmao I also just made that up right now

[Anonymous No.12203236]

>>12203232
based, I do the same thing all the time

[Anonymous No.12203237]

>>12203228
I like that we're finally seeing more companies focus on building things to put in orbit rather than just more launch vehicles. SNC being a shuttles and habs company is a good start.

[Anonymous No.12203240]

>>12203237
SN habs attached to starship for longer duration missions would be fucking 10/10 sexy.

[Anonymous No.12203242]

>>12203236
I do know that they didn't buy Bigelow's IP off of him, but I don't know if his work is shuffled back into the NASA archives for SNC to use.

[Anonymous No.12203271]

So what's the deal with this photon loop reactionless drive shit? I remember some people in here talking about how some massive reactionless skeptic was involved in testing and that he seemed extremely positive and we were waiting on some white papers? What's the deal bros? I want my reactionless future so bad.

[Anonymous No.12203276]

>>12203271
just wait, either nothing will happen and you'll know it was fake or something will happen and then you'll know it was fake

[Anonymous No.12203277]

>>12203271
Super optimistic EMDrive anons getting hyped up. I'm not saying it won't work, but they were blowing it WAY out of proportion. A similar test mesured results but it just ended up being a piece of tape outgassing so there has been a steady supply of memes about that ever since. Outgassing tape drive

[Anonymous No.12203295]

>>12203277
>outgassing tape drive

Still cheaper than SLS

[Anonymous No.12203296]

What's the next big milestone after the 15km hop?

[Anonymous No.12203304]

>>12203296
New Glenn

[Anonymous No.12203305]

>>12203296
SLS landing American astronauts on the lunar surface.

[Anonymous No.12203307]

>>12203296
doing it again with a different grain silo

[Anonymous No.12203311]

>>12203296
SN-9 validates Earth to Earth transport by launching from Boca Chica and landing a fuel depot on the US Capitol Building.

[Anonymous No.12203314]

Starship is inherently a racist program, which is why it will be cancelled. California state authorities will arrest Musk, just wait

[Anonymous No.12203317]

>>12203296
Lab padre chat says it all depends on how well the test goes. They will most likely do a 20km hop if they had a few problems but they are small (I assume). If it all goes correctly they might go for orbital. These autists cover this project religiously

[Anonymous No.12203318]

>>12203314
this just in: the Rogue Nuclear State known as the Free Martians has just declared California a non-place

[Anonymous No.12203321]

>>12203317
>If it all goes correctly they might go for orbital
Wait, with only a starship, or the full superheavy+starship stack?

[Anonymous No.12203322]

>>12203317
I think space is next too, though we might not see it for a long time.

[Anonymous No.12203325]

>>12203321
They probably won't spend a year on super heavy. Most of the testing for it has been done through starship testing sans the landing legs, which will probably only be rugged enough to get the thing on the ground in somewhat of one piece

[Anonymous No.12203329]

>>12203321
I remember someone doing the math and Starship can theoretically SSTO with no payload. No one knows for sure what test they'll do after SN8 unless Elon tweets to confirm though

[Anonymous No.12203332]

>>12203329
This makes me happy for spacex but somehow more angry at NASA for perusing such a gay ass rocket

[Anonymous No.12203334]

>>12203317
Imagine if the 15 km hop isn‘t a complete disaster. I can‘t really imagine it but that would be fucking stupid in what it means for the pace of the program. Might want to start stacking super heavy now, just in case.

[Anonymous No.12203337]

>>12203329
Whatever test they run, I doubt it‘s supposed to end with an empty prototype in orbit. I‘d think they‘d try to land on every try.

[Anonymous No.12203340]

>>12203337
Different anon but yeah of course. It's just crazy to know it's POSSIBLE (assuming this is true)

[Anonymous No.12203344]

HOP

[Anonymous No.12203348]

>>12203340
>>12203337
"possible" here meaning "without the nosecone or anything just the bare tankage but also aerodynamic and only barely at that" which is stupid and can be translated as "impossible" without losing any meaning

[Anonymous No.12203349]

>>12203334
It might be stacked before the end of the year, maybe before the end of November.

[Anonymous No.12203351]

>>12203340
Jesus fuck imagine if Earth was only slightly more massive and it took a 3 stage expendable starship just to get a dragon in orbit. I'd take SLS over that; that would be the worst timeline.

[Anonymous No.12203355]

Explode already! Hail Shelby

[Anonymous No.12203360]

>>12203318
Breaking report: Musk claims Martians have developed RKVs and says he will
"Glass urf" if independant status is not granted to the newly formed Martian Congressional Republic, UN special council convenes tonight, stay tuned for live updates on the Martian crisis.

[Anonymous No.12203363]

>>12203355
Checked. Starship is doomed.

[Anonymous No.12203371]

>>12203360
I can't believe Musk is a Contolist

[Anonymous No.12203372]

>>12203101
Sacre bleu!

[Anonymous No.12203373]

>>12203372
is it time to riot?

[Anonymous No.12203381]

>>12203101
Europe could catch up to Elon practically overnight if they chose to given the level of information that they have about SpaceXs designs. However Europe's governments are all ZOG slaves so their national agencies are doomed to make schlomos subcontractors rich for eternity. US got a godsent gift in Musk.

[Anonymous No.12203386]

>>12203381
>Europe could catch up to Elon practically overnight if they chose to
nigger you're crazy, it would take a minimum of 5-7 years for them to build a rocket like the Falcon 9. Probably 10 to build an imitation of Starship, which relies on its borderline magical engines that are nothing like anything in europe.

[Anonymous No.12203392]

>>12203101
ESA is a meme. The best they have is some prototypes they‘re developing. And the prototypes will be completed by the middle of the decade if it goes WELL. And then they‘d have to go and design an actual vehicle and create the production line.
Even if ESA went down this path, they‘d be stuck with a Falcon 9 clone by 2030 or something. This‘ll already be outdated several times over the way SpaceX is moving. But they‘re not even really committed to even this because what they actually wanted to do right now was to coast on Ariane 6 for ten years at least.
It‘s fucking ridiculous. The future projects departement of other space organizations is currently barely dreaming of starting work on what SpaceX has already achieved a few years ago now. And if anything SpaceX is speeding up even further.
What they actually need would be serious funding for an ambitious moonshot project to get ahead of this curve.
But at this point it doesn‘t seem like this is happening and instead Old Space can only hope Musk drops dead very soon.

[Anonymous No.12203394]

>>12203219
>radiation powered bacteria pop up and take over Mars

[Anonymous No.12203395]

>>12203386
It doesn't rely on magic engines though, that's the beauty of Starship. A 20% reduction in ISP would fucking suck, but could simply by compensated for by more tanker flights.

[Anonymous No.12203400]

>>12203296
>>12203317
they won't go straight from 20km to orbit. they'd do at least one 100km+ hop to get some data on its supersonic flight behavior

[Anonymous No.12203423]

>>12203351
>when you realise humans are heavy worlders

[Anonymous No.12203427]

>>12203400
Mmm good point

[Anonymous No.12203444]

>a fucking arm

[Anonymous No.12203449]

here's ur first stage bro

[Anonymous No.12203457]

>>12203449
I don't smoke.

[Anonymous No.12203458]

>>12203444
I just realized that the holdup for Starlink in Canada is probably because the Canadian government is funding Starlink competitor Telesat.

[Anonymous No.12203462]

Starships

[Anonymous No.12203463]

>a fucking arm

[Anonymous No.12203476]

>>12203449
Orange Tank Bad

>>12203462
Love twitter render niggas

[Anonymous No.12203489]

>>12203355
My man

[Anonymous No.12203512]

>>12203073
This, seriously. It would take like one bit of code, to make the fuel cans have propellant "crossfeed" capability if stacked directly onto each other with a booster at the bottom

[Anonymous No.12203519]

>>12203392
When was the skylon concept first shown off? 2005? Still nothing has flown and if they ever get it flying Starship will already have had years of service
God I hate this continent, the US is just widening the gap with innovation every year. By the time we have anything to compete with the falcon 9, Elon will have a mansion on Mars and China will be waging a war on the moon

[Anonymous No.12203546]

>>12203386
>>12203395
This. Honestly the benefit of Raptor being magic is allowing a decent payload fraction to Mars and having the capability to make the Booster the same diameter as the Starship. If you can't unlock magic alloys that can handle 900 degree 90% oxygen atmosphere at >800 bar, then just go for gas-generator sub cooled propalox and a Booster diameter 120% that of the upper stage diameter.
Alternatively, and yes I know it's sacrilege, you could do a hydrocarbon first stage and a hydrogen second stage. This would let you design your upper stage to be much wider without increasing its total mass at all because the extra volume is compensated for by the shitty density of hydrolox. Therefore you can keep the overall aerodynamic silver dildo profile yet still fit enough gas-generator powered engines on the first stage to lift the thing.

[Anonymous No.12203562]

>>12203519
>Still nothing has flown
Not only has nothing flown, they haven't even started on the engine IIRC. All their autism has been focused on getting the precooler's heat exchanger to work.
Skylon will never materialize and at this point I wouldn't be surprised if even their successful little bits of development just end up getting canned.

[Anonymous No.12203567]

>>12203562
How embarrassing. Eurofags cant even do better than the SLS even when they try, except maybe Ariane? Does anyone else take spaceflight as seriously as the US except the bullheaded russians and the chinese? Maybe the indians?

[Anonymous No.12203588]

>>12203519
>God I hate this continent, the US is just widening the gap with innovation every year.
A while back I worked in Brussels on an EU funded science framework and it was eye opening. Complacency, mediocrity and pure cynicism prevailed through all stages. They seemed to think innovation was the same in nature to any other line in the budget. Vast sums were wasted on projects that yielded next to nothing of value. The whole thing had a feeling of going through the motions. Extrapolate to an entire continent, admittedly with some exceptions, and you have science/innovation in Europe in 2020. The globohomo consensus, which obviously reigns supreme in Europe, is by its nature incompatible with the disruption of genuine progress.

[Anonymous No.12203593]

Related to that possible huge lava tube on the Moon: do y’all know about the evacuated magma chamber in Iceland? You can take an elevator all the way down. I want to go spelunking offworld so bad

[Anonymous No.12203595]

>>12203562
>>12203567
It's hardly a fair comparison though. Skylon/SABRE has had fuck all funding in space terms for its whole history. To be honest looking at the sums spent by other countries I sometimes wonder whether the UK wasn't smart to stay out of the launch business. It only gets cheaper to enter by the day.

[Anonymous No.12203677]

>>12202608
It's beautiful. It's the most awe-inspiring sight I have ever seen. Giver of life, mother of us all.

[Anonymous No.12203679]

>>12203567
The Indians are only ones I can take seriously. The rest of the big names had the means to compete but lacked (and still do) the mindset to actually bring it to fruition. India on the other hand has been quickly raising up an infrastructure from nothing but shat streets. That says a lot more than 'muh legacy' or 'muh funding'

[Anonymous No.12203680]

>>12202608
>how to short out electricity on an entire continent 101

[Anonymous No.12203720]

Nice OP recap.

[Anonymous No.12203729]

>>12203546
If you wanted to copy the BFR concept while lacking the materials knowledge, sacrificing some ISP and engine cycle life by doing it fully keralox is absolutely acceptable and allows you to retain the low cost. Putting hydrogen on it would run up costs by an order of magnitude or more.

[Anonymous No.12203732]

>>12203679
I was amused by things like how bad their mission control screens looked, but then I remembered I'm British and whilst our former colony are attempting to go to the moon we are the only nation in history to shut down its orbital launch capability

[Anonymous No.12203735]

>>12203729
This is what a competitor with any sense would do - go full on to mimic Starship but with a tried and tested kerolox engine. Obvs that's problematic for refuelling on Mars but goes a long way towards neutralising the massive cost drop Starship promises for EO payloads

[Anonymous No.12203738]

>>12203546
>you could do a hydrocarbon first stage and a hydrogen second stage
literally New Glenn
that's how I would do it as well

[Anonymous No.12203751]

>>12203679
>The Indians are only ones I can take seriously
What about Chyna? I'm sure they could do that shit too if they weren't dumping all their money and talent into building a navy and air force right now.

[Anonymous No.12203764]

>>12203751
>we could do that, but...
Yeah, that's the whole point. All the rest of the big players COULD do it, but excuse excuse excuse. Private US space and India are the only players actually making full and efficient use of the resources available to them.

[Anonymous No.12203777]

So apparently the Crew Dragon toilet is right out in the open with no privacy?

I guess it works among bros but mixed gender crews (or space tourism) is going to be rough

[Anonymous No.12203780]

>>12203735
Over the short term I would even be tempted to expend the second stage, because it's a giant cheap steel can (which it can still be with keralox). That would allow you to make up some of the difference in performance compared to SS in axing the landing fuel budget and heat shield, and running fully on vacuum optimized engines.

[Anonymous No.12203784]

>>12203764
china's in a decent pace i think
read here that they'll be orbital testing their falcon heavy clone this december
wouldn't be surprised if they nail it first try

[Anonymous No.12203792]

>>12203784
>falcon heavy clone
that's an interesting spin on a smallsat launcher built as a subscale Falcon 9, jej

[Anonymous No.12203812]

>>12203777
It has a privacy curtain

[Anonymous No.12203830]

>>12203777
Trips for space toilet
Looking at it again, I wonder how the hell you even use it to take a shit, it looks flush against the bulkhead.

[Anonymous No.12203877]

>>12203738
>literally New Glenn
Except bigger and both stages reusable

[Anonymous No.12203894]

>>12202570
I want to fuck it

[Anonymous No.12203901]

>>12202755
Space Exploration Technologies

[Anonymous No.12203915]

Not strictly spaceflight so don’t kill but I want to ask:

Is hydrogen a viable/desirable fuel for supersonic/hypersonic airliners?

[Anonymous No.12203956]

>>12203351

[Anonymous No.12203992]

Long March 6 launching from Jiquan on 14th October carrying Satellogic satellites
Long March 3b Launching Gaofen satellites on 12th October
No NOTAMs yet.

[Anonymous No.12203999]

>>12203992
Correction, Long march 3b is not certain yet

[Anonymous No.12204015]

>>12203999
Checked.

[Anonymous No.12204028]

Do we really need the gateway when we can have a 3D printed Regolith base on the moon for less than 5 Billion?
https://twitter.com/FutureJurvetson/status/1313199402954219521

[Anonymous No.12204032]

>>12204028
jobs program

[Anonymous No.12204040]

>>12204028
Easier to convince Congress that its simple to build by comparing it to ISS.

[Anonymous No.12204043]

I love being black
https://twitter.com/PGSFellowship

[Anonymous No.12204052]

>>12203915
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/lockheed-cl400-suntan.7228/

Some info there. Density implies a massive aircraft

[Anonymous No.12204059]

>>12203519
>When was the skylon concept first shown off? 2005?
I think it was later than that, but Skylon is descended from a program that starting in the early 80s.

[Anonymous No.12204084]

>>12204059
>80s
>they've had 40 fucking years
You must be joking, jesus christ

[Anonymous No.12204112]

https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1313859484436099079?s=20
He wants to make it home alive

[Anonymous No.12204128]

>>12204084
Extreme lack of funding. Thry might actually benefit from COVID since British government has decided that they will spend billions in research and development so they might get loads of dosh. Rolls Royce also has partnered with them now.

[Anonymous No.12204141]

>>12204112
lmaooooo, even the first Shuttle launch didn't see any astronaut backing out like this

[Anonymous No.12204142]

>>12204084
> They've
Who is They then? At times it's been one fucking guy keeping the idea alive and it's had fuck all funding over that time. We can all pull retarded concepts out of our arse but firstly the US were the only ones stupid enough to actually build and incinerate astronauts in one, and secondly there's now actual hardware in terms of the precooler which is regarded by non-tards as genuinely innovative. There is plenty to laugh about as regards UK space policy but HOTL/Skylon/SABRE is not really a worthwhile target

[Anonymous No.12204152]

>>12204112
If it's Boeing I'm not going!

[Anonymous No.12204153]

>>12204112
kek. BOING will need his own astronauts to test the thing.

[Anonymous No.12204164]

Today in history:
>1958 – The U.S. manned space-flight project is renamed Project Mercury.
>1959 – The Soviet probe Luna 3 transmits the first-ever photographs of the far side of the Moon.
>2002 – The Space Shuttle Atlantis launches on STS-112 to continue assembly of the International Space Station.
>2008 – Asteroid 2008 TC3 impacts the Earth over Sudan, the first time an asteroid impact is detected prior to its entry into earth's atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.12204165]

>>12204112
HOLY FUCK NOT EVEN TEST PILOTS WILL TOUGH IT

[Anonymous No.12204171]

>>12204112
Astronauts flew on the shuttle after it blew up. The absolute state of boeing

[Anonymous No.12204178]

>>12204112
Got cold feet cause Boeing was failing America hard for the past decade or so. Its the rational thing to do if I was in their place.

[Anonymous No.12204181]

>>12204164
Thank you for cool facts.

[Anonymous No.12204182]

>>12204152
kek

[Anonymous No.12204189]

>>12204171
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-27
Hell they once came down even though they were sure the heat shield was fucked and they were gonna die.

[Anonymous No.12204207]

>>12204141
>>12204152
>>12204165
>>12204171
>>12204178

he's old and was there mostly for the prestige achievement of getting the US back to space after the shuttle
now that that's gone, not much reason to go through the stress

[Anonymous No.12204209]

>>12204112
It might not be his decision. Apollo 13 astronaut Lovell wanted to go back on Apollo but his wife said no. Maybe something similar happened with Wilmore.

[Anonymous No.12204215]

>>12204207
Not just that, Starliner is likely delayed till early/mid next year due to recent tests finding new problems.

[Anonymous No.12204216]

>Leak found on SN8
Looks like a static fire will have to wait awhile.

[Anonymous No.12204217]

>>12204215
Yeah I'm guessing this means he got word that it's getting delayed even further.

[Anonymous No.12204224]

>>12204207
Would you pass up a chance to go to space? Or test fly a brand new vehicle? Both of those are incredible incentive on their own

[Anonymous No.12204228]

>>12204216
I love Elon's tweet
>s-successful test guys
>uh, yeah we're gonna try again just to be safe
SpaceX is finished

[Anonymous No.12204229]

>Ferguson: "Next year is very important for my family. I have made several commitments which I simply cannot risk missing. I'm not going anywhere – I'm just not going to space next year."
https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1313857717283491840

[Anonymous No.12204233]

>>12204229
so it's a confirmed deathtrap

[Anonymous No.12204239]

>>12204216
>awhile
few days

[Anonymous No.12204240]

>>12204229
>"I have made several commitments that require me to be alive, which I simply cannot risk by flying in Boing!'s worthless fucking deathtrap capsule!"
Holy fucking shit how can a human being get more based?

[Anonymous No.12204248]

>>12204112
Well he said he wants to spend time with his family
Maybe it could be illness in the family...

[Anonymous No.12204249]

>>12204112
Elon offered him command of the first manned starship instead

[Anonymous No.12204251]

>>12204239
cope harder spacex stan, SN8 wont launch this year. if anything it will blow up before november

[Anonymous No.12204256]

>>12204251
Weak bait, but seriously SpaceX? I thought you made this one out of the new alloy.

[Anonymous No.12204259]

>>12204256
You're not supposed to respond to weak baits

[Anonymous No.12204265]

>>12204256
I actually do believe SN8 will blow up before november. and I do believe you are a spacex stan. maybe sn8 will launch? that might be bait

[Anonymous No.12204268]

>>12204249
>individual starships have permanent captains and crews instead of switching around every mission

yes... yessssssss...

>>12204256
if he thinks it can get fixed today then the leak probably isn't in the tank itself

[Anonymous No.12204276]

>>12204265
>>12204251
>spacex stan
This is attempted humor yes?

[Anonymous No.12204294]

>>12204216

[Anonymous No.12204300]

>>12202887
USAF doesn't want to give their toy to USSF

[Anonymous No.12204304]

>>12204300
what was the point of the space force if the air force still has their own space operations?

[Anonymous No.12204319]

>>12204300
Haven't they already done so?

[Anonymous No.12204320]

>>12202398
Boom Supersonic rollout in 30 mins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ina8FFOvOg
Commerical supersonic, 50 passengers.

[Anonymous No.12204341]

>>12204300
>>12204304
>Walden said his office has experience in managing and flying X-37B missions.
>“Right now, I think it would be unfair to transition it to somebody else and expect them to understand it overnight,” he said.
>Walden did not rule out the possibility that the Air Force could transition the X-37B program to the Space Force in the future.
The Air Force doesn't think the Space Force is ready to handle the X-37B yet. Sounds like they're full of shit, but maybe they're right?

[Anonymous No.12204342]

>>12203271
Don't post my wife

[Anonymous No.12204346]

>>12204341
Source: https://spaceflightnow.com/2020/08/18/pentagon-plans-to-keep-x-37b-spaceplane-under-air-force-management/

[Anonymous No.12204353]

>>12204320
Supersonic is a dead end for airlines. The future of long distance travel is Earth to Earth hops.

[Anonymous No.12204356]

>>12204353
[doubt]

[Anonymous No.12204360]

Starliner flight when?
It's about time American returns to the Stars with all American-made and powered spaceship and rocket!

[Anonymous No.12204363]

>>12203777
Wait for starship and it's poopoo cabins. Until then its either this or diapers take your pick.

[Anonymous No.12204367]

>>12203329
Starship can only SSTO without heatshield and landing legs. And the whole point of ssto is to reuse the rocket.

[Anonymous No.12204370]

>>12204341
Its politics

[Anonymous No.12204379]

>>12204341
Just normal branch infighting. The Aifr Force doesn't want the Army having their own air support either, so much do that they got it codified into law that only the AF (and Navy and Marines) can operate fixed wing assets larger than a Cessna. Meanwhile while the Navy can't get an operational large caliber gun working despite a Paladin on a boat being literally just fine.

[Anonymous No.12204380]

>>12204320
This is just a rollout for their 1/3 demonstrator. Still excited for it, wonder if we'll get any info on its fuel economy.

[Anonymous No.12204390]

>>12204367
NO. The whole point is to get to orbit in a single stage.

[Anonymous No.12204409]

>>12204342
doog is not for sexual

[Anonymous No.12204429]

>>12204409
i want to cum inside anime girls

[Anonymous No.12204431]

well it looks cool at least

[Anonymous No.12204436]

>>12204431
>that lag
Fucking hell

[Anonymous No.12204440]

Would it be possible to send a manned mission to europa once starship is functioning? Ob iousoy not with the starship itself but taking advantage of low ñaunch costs to assemble the craft in orbit.

[Anonymous No.12204450]

>>12204440
everything's possible anon

[Anonymous No.12204459]

>>12203777
>in the middle of taking a massive dump and you realize you forgot to turn off the livestream camera

[Anonymous No.12204462]

>>12204440
Landing on Jupiter's moons (and returning) takes a crazy amount of delta V because orbital velocity around Jupiter is so high. Even if you aerobrake it's still over 14 km/s to land on Europa from LEO and more than that to return. It's hard to see that being done with chemical rockets.

That's to say nothing about the radiation issues.

[Anonymous No.12204463]

>>12204294
>elon embarassed over shrinkage

[Anonymous No.12204465]

>>12204390
You are objectively and demonstrably wrong.

[Anonymous No.12204478]

>>12204390
>the whole point of ssto is ssto

[Anonymous No.12204492]

>>12204409
Doog is only for sexual
Can't make kids with Doog

[Anonymous No.12204515]

>>12204478
The whole point of SSTO is the challenge of doing it and the prestige of succeeding

We choose to go to space with one stage, not because it is easy, but because it is haaahhhd

[Anonymous No.12204519]

>>12204478
>>12204465
Nice to see you have no argument otherwise. Proves I'm 100% unequivocally correct.

[Anonymous No.12204520]

the whole point of ssto is that you ran out of extra stages

[Anonymous No.12204524]

>>12202520

[Anonymous No.12204533]

>>12202755
>Model S
>Model 3
>Model X
>Model Y

[Anonymous No.12204544]

>>12204533
>Cybertruck
>ATV
>Roadster
>Semi

[Anonymous No.12204545]

>>12203735
Kerolox has issues because your oxygen will boil away and your kerosene will freeze solid over long durations, it's better to invest in propane engines (they don't need to be magic like Raptor but it helps lol) so everything can be kept at the same temperature for tanker (DEPOT) use

[Anonymous No.12204547]

bretty cool

[Anonymous No.12204552]

Elon really should stick with orbital and not bother with sub-orbital desu, I think the convenience of supersonic travel will trump the convenience of rocket travel once you factor in all the extra steps and precautions and of course possibility of aborts and scrubs which are much less likely with planes.

[Anonymous No.12204565]

>>12204552
I personally think point to point will never be a thing except in limited use cases such as military, the psychological barrier for most people is too big, combine that with the massive sonic booms starship makes, the several gs exerted on passengers and a much higher fuel cost than aviation and I'm pretty sure it's a dead end. Good to get money from investors though.

[Anonymous No.12204566]

>>12204552
been a while since we've had new concept art of supersonic af1s

also even if you throw out convenience (strapping passengers in to a VTOL cabin?) rockets can't come remotely close to the fuel efficiency of airliners

[Anonymous No.12204578]

>>12204566
>>12204552
Not enough internal room for all the fixings that go into AF1, it would be better suited to transporting the VP

[Anonymous No.12204581]

>>12204565
Not to mention the convenience and ease of traveling to an airport to board and depart compared to some far off seaport adding extra time to travel no matter what, it just feels too niche and like something supersonic airliners will easily fill in.

[Anonymous No.12204584]

>>12204547
>>12204552
The Overture seems more likely to become reality than every other proposed SST and is the only one that isn't secretly a bizjet, but it's still got like a 2% chance.
E2E is still a head-scratcher for me. Sure, if it worked, it would be pretty damn fast, but there is just so much that can go wrong and so many issues that need to be worked around. Most importantly, rockets are a few orders of magnitude less safe than planes right now. I wonder if they just put that out there to show off versatility and maybe get the attention of the military for transport purposes.

[Anonymous No.12204585]

>>12204578
There are smaller 757 based planes Trump also uses as AF1 for flying to smaller airports.

[Anonymous No.12204590]

>>12204578
Nixon fought ferociously to keep the SST program going because he didn't want the French president to show up to summits in a cooler plane than him.

[Anonymous No.12204607]

How high do you have to go to see the curvature of the Earth from an airplane window? A guy I know said that he was in a business jet which flew to 16 kilometers and he could see it, but other sources say that that’s too low.

[Anonymous No.12204613]

>>12204607
There's a hullo for that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpUcZXiKtfU

you could probably see it from 16 km but not from a normal passenger window. maybe from a cockpit.

[Anonymous No.12204620]

>>12204519
Why would you keep your rocket intact until orbit, only to throw it away once it reaches orbit? Mught as well have multiple expendable stages.

[Anonymous No.12204622]

https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/7/21505912/boeing-astronaut-nasa-chris-ferguson-withdraws-starliner-flight
>Boeing astronaut withdraws himself from first crewed test flight of passenger spacecraft
“Next year is very important for my family” “I have made several commitments which I simply cannot risk missing."
>Implying star liner will fly in 2021
I guess making commitments to being alive it's a good reason.

[Anonymous No.12204627]

What happens if SLS fails during its green run? Like let’s say the tank ruptures or the engines have trouble or something? What if it detonated and takes out the testing facility?

Would SLS be done?

[Anonymous No.12204630]

>>12204627
Yes

[Anonymous No.12204633]

>>12204627
If Starship reaches orbit before they have Artemis 1 on the pad? Probably.

[Anonymous No.12204648]

>>12204622
>Yeah no thanks I want to live so ill take a pass on riding with boing

Extreme kek

[Anonymous No.12204653]

>>12204112
uh twitter seems to not be working for me, could you screencap it plox

[Anonymous No.12204657]

>>12204653
see
>>12204622

[Anonymous No.12204658]

>>12204515
This, an SSTO would be doable easily with a rotating pulse detonation aerospike. Use LOX/CH4, an RPD engine can push your ISP up to 475, you don't have to worry about leakage or excessive cryocooling as you do with LOX/LH2. Tanks can be simple steel or lithium/aluminum, a vehicle the size of Venturestar could probably manage a payload capacity of 30-35 tons.
All the technologies already exist, as is usual the problem is a lack of ambition for technological synthesis.

[Anonymous No.12204659]

>>12204552
I would love to look up and see a delta wing again, even if it isn't Concorde. It used to be so cool. Still amazes me to think the UK and France managed to bury the hatchet long enough to build and fly an SST - something even the mighty USA and USSR failed to achieve (Concordski doesn't count due to the obvious fact it was a heap of shit). Goes to show what Europe can do when it intermittently finds its nuts.
I note Overture will be powered by Rolls Royce which is something of a nice legacy for Concorde.

[Anonymous No.12204661]

>>12204658
Rotating pulse detonation engines barely exist on a lab table. This is not a mature technology that's ready for any kind of systems engineering like an SSTO vehicle.

[Anonymous No.12204662]

>>12204658
>rotating pulse detonation methalox aerospike
>All the technologies already exist

[Anonymous No.12204668]

>>12204112
>>12204653
>>12204622
Check the article in ^^^

[Anonymous No.12204671]

>>12204658
If it was better than FFSC methalox TSTO then Elon would be doing it. Protip it's not because SSTOs are shit unless you have magic fusion engines.

[Anonymous No.12204676]

https://www.universetoday.com/148147/the-air-leak-on-the-international-space-station-is-worse-than-previously-believed/
> Roscosmos also said in a statement that “it was established that the spot is located in the Zvezda (star) service module, which contains scientific equipment.” They also emphasized that the leak “is not dangerous for the life and health of the ISS crew and does not prevent the ISS continuing manned flight.” Nevertheless, the amount of atmosphere lost may require additional oxygen to be pumped into the station.

More Russian hardware leaking on the station. At least this one has the excuse of being on orbit for decades.

[Anonymous No.12204682]

>>12202495
>mad about Felix
lol

[Anonymous No.12204683]

>>12204661
I said RPD engines exist, not that they are mature, maturation of that particular technology would be a necessary part of synthesis with other existing technologies, but unless the world's governments suddenly change their mind about firing nuclear rockets in Earth's atmosphere RPD rockets are the next viable step forward for Earth launched vehicles.
>>12204662
Yes, experimental RPD engine testbeds already exist, LOX/CH4 engines already exist, they even fly water towers down in Texas with them, and aerospikes already exist, the RS2200 was absolutely a mature design although fundamentally dated design limits it's usefulness.

[Anonymous No.12204691]

>>12204661
AFRL is dumping money into rapid development of rotating detonation engines to replace turbines on missiles and fighters. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see flying prototypes within 5 years.

[Anonymous No.12204693]

>>12204671
I was agreeing with an Anon who was talking about the benefit of working on an SSTO for the sake of pushing technological achievement forward. Such a vehicle could not match a TSTO for maximum payload capacity, especially since a LOX/CH4 RPD Aerospike could just as soon be applied to a TSTO and catapult it's capabilities beyond the equivalent SSTO.
The point of such a project would be to take on such a project because it forces technological advancement through overcoming the inherent limitations of the SSTO method of launch.

[Anonymous No.12204694]

>>12202608
>It gives me conniptions

[Anonymous No.12204695]

>>12204544
https://youtu.be/zOYrcchVJyA
>>12204657
>>12204668
yes thanks you could have just called me a nigger instead that would have worked just as well

[Anonymous No.12204698]

>>12204658
If we had 475 Isp methalox RPD engines we'd put them on the upper stage of a reusable TSTO like starship and increase maximum payload to orbit as well as stage delta V with max payload.
I've never understood the logic of handicapping ourselves by applying advancements in propulsion technology to less effective vehicle designs.

[Anonymous No.12204699]

>>12204695
you weren't being a nigger, just a feebleminded smegma-sniffing faggot. NOW you're being a nigger.

[Anonymous No.12204706]

>>12204698
Because the lest effective design drives the improvement of it's propulsion technology. Being limited to one stage would demand that the maximum amount of performance be drawn out of the engine design.

[Anonymous No.12204708]

>>12204683
>LOx/CH4 engines already exist
yes, but the physics of RPD engines is such that you can't just assume that an RPD will work with any given fuel combo
what are the current laboratory RPD engines using?
>>12204698
even if you had practical RPD engines, you'd still use Raptor for Super Heavy because of the increased thrust area density? I agree.
>>12204699
ah that's true, thank you

[Anonymous No.12204728]

>>12204708
The NASA testbed uses LOX/LH2, there would need to be some adjustment for LOX/CH4 but these kinds of engines are also being proposed for a means to finally surpass and replace the turbojet, so I believe it would be a fair assumption that they can also operate with Kerosene. If the engine can operate with a fuel element as dense as Kerosene and one as light as LH2, it should be able to work with CH4 as well.

[Anonymous No.12204736]

>>12204728
what the fuck is everybody goddamn obsession with liquid cocksucking hydrogen

[Anonymous No.12204739]

>>12204698
>I've never understood the logic of handicapping ourselves by applying advancements in propulsion technology to less effective vehicle designs.
Starship actually makes a good case for it. We've seen you can stand up a spaceport for single stage methalox launchers in a field with a box of scraps in a year. If you can get that 30 ton payload with full reusability you've completely destroyed the market for other countries' Falcon 9 clones (and half of Vulcan's market lmao) for payloads that don't justify a full Starship launch. Also SSTO runway landing is going to be better for orbital tourism since passengers can be delivered back to one of the many Shuttle landing site airports that also serves commercial airliners.

>>12204736
dude Isp lmao
that's literally it

[Anonymous No.12204742]

>>12204736
t. glushko

[Anonymous No.12204753]

>>12204698
>I've never understood the logic of handicapping ourselves by applying advancements in propulsion technology to less effective vehicle designs.
For cargo you're totally right, transporting humans is a different story.
TSTO will never get airliner levels of safety.

[Anonymous No.12204756]

>>12204584
Rockets need to become as safe as jetliners if you're going to move a million people to Mars without killing half of them.

[Anonymous No.12204757]

>>12204739
if you're trying to do full SSTO reusability RPD VTHL spaceplane memes you might as well go for TSTO full reusability RPD VTHL (upper stage) spaceplane memes instead and get a better, safer ship out of it
put your RPD spaceplane on top of a Super Heavy and BAM you've just doubled your margins
I do agree, VTHL is the way to go for LEO tourism

[Anonymous No.12204762]

>>12204112
But what could possibly have gone wrong?

[Anonymous No.12204763]

>>12204164
Reminds me of this: A magazine about the soviet union that I have some of; the 1959 october version has this on it.

The text at the top says: "The sea of dreams wait's for it's Colubus'"

[Anonymous No.12204765]

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/rise-of-the-rockets/

Watched this last night
Has SLS propaganda and Lori Garver shows up
At one point they hype up hydrogen as THE rocket fuel to use
Good for a laugh

[Anonymous No.12204769]

>>12204765
Can somebody rip that shit for us non-burgers? It's not available outside the US.

[Anonymous No.12204772]

>>12204763
"The automatic space stations location while imaging the other side of the moon. (the arrows on the right indicate the direction of sunlight)"

[Anonymous No.12204775]

>>12204753
TSTO will get much closer than SSTO, because TSTO can handle the dry mass increase that comes with designing large strength margins and robustness into your vehicle.

[Anonymous No.12204776]

>>12204545
>DEPOT
Deposited
Extra
Propulsion
Orbital
Tanker

[Anonymous No.12204785]

>U.S. Transportation Command is working with SpaceX for Starship P2P flight.
https://www.ustranscom.mil/cmd/panewsreader.cfm?ID=29ADE173-D927-8E46-7C6CBC100BAD9F71&yr=2020

It's fucking happening.

[Anonymous No.12204789]

I just don't get it, is Starship supposed to refuel in orbit by another Starship? In that case, then how are they supposed to refuel the orbital tanker?

[Anonymous No.12204797]

>>12204789
It lands back home

[Anonymous No.12204801]

>>12204763
The Finnish language frightens me.

[Anonymous No.12204802]

>>12204785
MY DICK IS DIAMONDS

[Anonymous No.12204803]

>>12204789
Tanker-SS's payload is fuel, after dumping its payload it will return back to earth.

[Anonymous No.12204804]

>>12204772
the space laboratory on an assembly station and a diagram of it's workings:

1. the imaging hole
2. The navigation computer starter
3. Solar alarm
4. Solar cells
5. Radiators
6. Heat reflectors
7. Antennae
8. Scientific experiments

[Anonymous No.12204806]

>>12204789
>how do you refuel the tanker
more tankers

[Anonymous No.12204813]

>>12202495
>i hate that fucker from "what about it" hes a piece of shit
YOU ROCK!

[Anonymous No.12204815]

>>12204785
>Starship becomes part of the military's critical logistics path
How will Shelby ever recover?

[Anonymous No.12204818]

>>12204806
> The raids, at almost 6,600 nautical miles (12,200 km) and 16 hours for the return journey, were the longest-ranged bombing raids in history at that time.
Black Buck was BASED

[Anonymous No.12204821]

>>12204815
Elon is a fucking genius, he sees Biden winning so he's Congress-proofing SpaceX by making it a key military supplier.

[Anonymous No.12204823]

ASSES TO ASSES
STARSHIPS TO STARSHIPS
WE KNOW MAJOR BOB IS CHUNKY

[Anonymous No.12204826]

>>12204821
>he sees Biden winning
lmao no

[Anonymous No.12204831]

>>12204823
BRANSON CAN'T FLY SO HIGH
HITTING AN ALL TIME LOW

[Anonymous No.12204840]

>>12204826
Disagree too, but not outside the realm of possibility that he's hedging his bets just in case, it'd be prudent even though I doubt Harris will win.

[Anonymous No.12204842]

>>12204826
I don't want to derail but Biden is an easy 80/20 favorite right now and it's silly to be in denial.

[Anonymous No.12204847]

>>12204826

It's allways a possibility that the old fuck actualy pulls it off. No one could've predicted in 2015 that Donald Trump of all people would become president so it isnt impossible.

Elon is just making sure that if the unlikely happens, SpaceX's future will be secured.

[Anonymous No.12204851]

>>12204831
>Be Michael Alsbury
>Feather the ship’s wings 14 seconds after engine ignition and while it ascending
>Why the fuck would you do that?

[Anonymous No.12204854]

>>12204806
Forgot the obligatory
> weirdest plane ever
pic

[Anonymous No.12204856]

>>12204847
I don't see Biden winning on his own merits, I see Trump in a self destructive Twitter spiral and almost ten points behind in the polls. I know the Trump camp doesn't like polls, but if you assume the same magnitude of polling error this year as in 2016 (ie, give Trump 4-5 points for free in swing states) he's still behind.

[Anonymous No.12204863]

>>12204842
Polls always tighten

[Anonymous No.12204864]

>>12204851
He was using 4x physical timewarp and accidentally hit WASD. Happens to all of us! Just revert to launch pad lol.

>>12204854
Obligatory "everything bad that has happened to England since 1945 was due to the scrapping of Warspite"

[Anonymous No.12204869]

>>12204797
>>12204803
How is this not a waste of fuel? Sounds really expensive, surely there must be a better way

[Anonymous No.12204870]

>>12204863
They haven't, though. They've been weirdly stable. Biden is in about the same position he was in June which is almost unheard of.

[Anonymous No.12204873]

>>12204869
What do you mean? The only two ways to refuel a Starship off of Earth are to bring fuel to it with tankers, or make the fuel in situ. Since there's not really good carbon on the Moon, the only source near Earth of easy methane is Earth.

[Anonymous No.12204874]

>>12204869
The only way around the fuel cost of getting to orbit is non-chemical launch like a space elevator.

[Anonymous No.12204878]

>>12204856
Several people on /sfg/ have claimed that biden is anti space.
how much of that is true?

[Anonymous No.12204882]

>>12204804
"Through thorough inspection of the pictures received from the automatic space station, the following locations have been mapped out."

1. A large grouping of craters 300km across, christened the Sea of Moscow
2. Spacefarers bay in the aforementioned sea
3. The southern sea continuing to the backside of the moon
4. Tsiolkovsky's crater with it's central peak
5. Lomonosov's crater with it's central peak
6. Joliot-Curie's crater
7. Sovetsky-mountain range
8. the Sea of Dreams

The dotted line drawn across the moon represents the equator, the divider between the parts visible and invisible to earth
The confidently known places have been surrounded with an unbroken line, while those marked with a dotted line require further analysis, those with dots surrounding them are being further studied

Following places marked with roman numerals can be seen from earth

I. Humbold's sea
II. Sea of Crises
III. A border sea, which extends to the dark side
IV. Ocean of Storms
V. Smith's sea, which extends to the dark side
VI. Sea of Fertility
VII. Southern sea, which extends to the dark side

[Anonymous No.12204885]

>>12204856
I expected 2016 to be close because I could look at the national polls and see Hillary was consistently having trouble breaking 45% (media neglected to ever notice this). Biden's easily cracking 50% in most polls now. There's always time left for surprises but I'd guess a final result somewhere in the neighborhood of Biden winning 51.5%-46.5%. This is /sci/, we can do better than hurr-durr-polls-always-wrong.

>>12204878
I doubt he's ever given serious thought to it, but when dems are in power the tendency is to deprioritize NASA's budget. There's a good chance HLS won't get the funding it needs if that happens.

[Anonymous No.12204891]

>>12204864
>Obligatory "everything bad that has happened to England since 1945 was due to the scrapping of Warspite"
Explain

[Anonymous No.12204894]

>>12204870
Hmm ok. Well I guess we might get the civil war sooner than expected then

[Anonymous No.12204897]

>>12204882
As a bonus, here are some matchbox covers that luckily my grandpa never cut out.

[Anonymous No.12204899]

>“Think about moving the equivalent of a C-17 payload anywhere on the globe in less than an hour."

https://spacenews.com/u-s-transportation-command-to-study-use-of-spacex-rockets-to-move-cargo-around-the-world/

Boing on suicide watch

[Anonymous No.12204900]

>>12204823
>WE KNOW MAJOR BOB IS CHUNKY
kek

[Anonymous No.12204903]

>>12204885
>This is /sci/, we can do better than hurr-durr-polls-always-wrong.
For me personally when I decided to put money on Trump in 2016 was when I saw a BBC report that had a guy saying he'd never seen crowds like he was seeing at Trump rallies. Obvs that's not happening this time

[Anonymous No.12204904]

>>12204897
sputnik 3 on the top right

[Anonymous No.12204906]

>>12204891
HMS Warspite fought in every major British naval battle in both world wars including Jutland, where she took the focused fire of the entire High Seas Fleet and lived to tell.

They scrapped her for the steel. And immediately lost the entire empire, space program, tech base, dignity, national pride, and luck. Warspite has cursed that island.

[Anonymous No.12204907]

>>12204899
OH NO NO NO NO

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_C-17_Globemaster_III

[Anonymous No.12204910]

>>12204897
There's even some jokes about Luna 2 exploding over the moon and leaving those little soviet badges around

[Anonymous No.12204913]

>>12204907
>unit cost higher than Starship
hehehehahaHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.12204919]

>>12204899
>>12204907
Jesus Christ, Elon isn't just going to eat Boing!'s lunch, but their breakfast and dinner too. They'll be nothing but a husk producing a handfull of stealth planes and obscure DOD meme projects a year.

[Anonymous No.12204923]

>>12204842
You mean the exact same 80/20 split the polls said when trump beat hillary?

[Anonymous No.12204926]

>>12204919
If Cessna starts building jet airliners Boeing is finished forever.

[Anonymous No.12204929]

>>12204785
ODSTs soon

[Anonymous No.12204930]

>>12204899
If SpaceX perfects their Point to Point, they can easily sell their Starships to US military for ~$1 Billion if they wanted to. 1 hour transport anywhere in the world is not possible with any conventional vehicles. It would be a HUEG boon to US military for critical transport.

[Anonymous No.12204935]

>>12204913
by close to an order of magnitude unless man-rating really balloons the cost
>fleet of 1,000 Starships full of troops and equipment drop out of orbit on top of your shithole
IMAGINE

[Anonymous No.12204936]

>>12204923
No, if you actually look at "dah polls" instead of repeating it as a buzzword you'd see Biden has a serious lead on Hillary.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/trump-vs-biden-national-polls-2020-vs-2016/

Enough that if you apply the 2016 polling error to 2020, Biden is still ahead.

[Anonymous No.12204937]

>>12204930
They won't even need to, they could sell it for $500 million a piece and by rolling in the money, especially with DoD contracts for Starlink.

[Anonymous No.12204939]

>>12204926
Some day Elon will unveil an electric jet, Boing! will cease to exist.

[Anonymous No.12204942]

>>12204936
>realclearpolitics
Nice unbiased source bro

[Anonymous No.12204946]

So realistically, are drop pods feasible? Every movie/game/Tv show has them falling straight down and super fast too. IRL they’d probably deorbit then take like 45 minutes to land, and even then it’s hard to give them the ability to land anywhere on earth on a whim because of their included orbits.

[Anonymous No.12204947]

>>12204935
Starship won't do combat drops. It's fat and unmaneuverable and comes in on a near ballistic trajectory. Easy pickings for even 70s AA. What Starship will specialize in is regional logistics – say, yeeting Bradleys from US bases to Germany or Taiwan.

[Anonymous No.12204951]

>>12204936
>RCP
OH NO NO NO NO, get the fuck out of here with this shit Anon.

[Anonymous No.12204952]

>>12204930
>>12204899

Imagine the Hollywood kino of featuring Starship traversing the world in their movies.

[Anonymous No.12204953]

>>12204942
>>12204951
Believe what you'd like, if you're too stupid to take a simple average yourself I can't help you. Just realize you're as cocky now as ShareBlue was in 2016, and with less to back it up.

[Anonymous No.12204954]

>>12204953
okay boomer

[Anonymous No.12204957]

>>12204953
>Just realize you're as cocky now as ShareBlue was in 2016, and with less to back it up.
David Brock's own PAC admits that this year's polls are trash, fampai. You can't average bad data to get good data.

https://twitter.com/guycecil/status/1313913531834736641

[Anonymous No.12204959]

>>12204954
the stock market thinks Biden is going to win

[Anonymous No.12204960]

>>12204907
>>12204913
>unit cost higher than Starship
No way this is true, no fucking way

[Anonymous No.12204961]

>>12204946
You mean like what Crew Dragon did by entering the atmosphere with parachutes?

Sure its possible. Heck it may even be possible without parachutes if SpaceX decided to spend more time/money/research into perfecting their propulsive landing for their Dragon crafts. But time/money/r&d is something that can be done by another company if they get money. SpaceX wanted speed, so they went with easier parachutes.

[Anonymous No.12204963]

>>12204959
The stock market thought clinton was going to win

[Anonymous No.12204964]

>>12204947
intercepting a starship is essentially intercepting an ICBM that happens to land instead of explode. not many places have that kind of capability, sure it's a predictable path but the window to react is tiny. and unlike an ICBM the destination doesn't have to be a high value and thus predictable target.

[Anonymous No.12204966]

>>12204961
SpaceX wanted propulsive landing. NASA insisted on the parachutes.

[Anonymous No.12204971]

>>12204946
>>12204961
Crew Dragon as it exists right now just needs a software update to be a propulsively landed drop pod (although the lack of legs means you might want to choose a soft spot to land). But drop pods are dumb because they're easy to shoot down.

[Anonymous No.12204974]

>>12204966
SpaceX wanted propulsive landing BUT they found it too time consuming/costly to r/d while at the same time they would also be doing parachutes as backup. So they used parachute only instead. To save time/money.

[Anonymous No.12204975]

>>12204953
>If you don't believe sources so bias they're basically propaganda organizations then you're STOOOOOPID!
Nah, I'm just not convinced by your garbage source, which was garbage for information back in 2016 (and frankly, always was even before that) and if anything is more garbage now than it ever has been in the past.
Take your RCP/CNN/MSNBC/NBC/ABC/Bullshittery polls and kindly insert them into your ass sideways, and while you're at it fuck off of our spaceflight thread with your politicking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWLB7kouIHc

[Anonymous No.12204976]

>>12204964
Strong disagree. Starship is way more vulnerable because it needs to slow down to land instead of just plowing into the target and exploding at Mach 5 like an ICBM warhead. During coast in space you're right, ASAT technology is hard. Targeting during entry would be tricky too. But the moment it starts skydiving subsonically it's fucked.

[Anonymous No.12204977]

>>12204229
This needs more attenton because it is funny as shit (and very, very unlucky and sad for Ferguson).
>Makes the hard decision to leave NASA for Boeing
>Did so under the assumption that Boeing would make it to space after shuttle
>As part of Commercial Crew, each company had the option to send a personal employee up to the Station as part of their demo mission
>Ferguson was told he would be one of the first astronauts to return the flag; he wanted to go as a Boeing employee because he thought it was a done deal.
>We all know what happened lmao. He is now leaving because his dream was crushed
Que the music Johnny!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag1o3koTLWM

[Anonymous No.12204985]

>>12204975
>REEEE ORANGE MAN GOOD POLLS BAD REEEEE
lol ok believe what you like

[Anonymous No.12204991]

>>12204930
I know I keep sperging about this but point-to-point can't possibly replace a c-17 for normal operations.

A c-17 has a fuel economy of .041 km per kg of jet fuel. For a 20000 km trip that comes out to 476 tons of fuel for 77 tons, or 6187 kg of fuel per ton of payload.

Starship will take approximately 1200 tons of methane per flight with a 100 ton payload, or 12000 kg of fuel per ton of payload (along with 36000 kg of LOX).

If there's some sorta battlefield logistics need where time is at a premium, then sure. But for normal operations a c-17 wins every time.

[Anonymous No.12204992]

>>12204976
It might be most useful going the other way. Think about one hour Starship medevac from the front lines to a major military hospital like Ramstein or Walter Reed. If there are enemy SAM batteries off Wallops Island or in central Germany we've got bigger problems.

[Anonymous No.12204994]

>>12204975
I don't trust polling any more than you, but I'm at least a little wary about the mail-in shit and the obvious push from basically all media to manufacture faux support for Harris's campaign.
Complacency is a mistake, remember how it helped doom the Witch last time around.

[Anonymous No.12204997]

>>12204976
don't land right on top of an AA site, not that hard when you basically have your pick. the subsonic regime is short and low altitude.

[Anonymous No.12205005]

>>12204992
>be american soldier
>defending Taipei, 2024
>get shot in the stomach, big bloody wound, barely conscious
>medevac rushes you to the spaceport
>get strapped into a ready Starship and BOOOOOOSTED stateside
>at 3g
>blood doesn't drain in space, medics desperately try to keep your wounds free in microgravity
>captain says reentry coming up
>5g of deceleration
>your guts get ripped out
>neuralink uploads you to a new clone body, courtesy of the United States Marine Corps

[Anonymous No.12205007]

>>12204977
When it comes to starliner, this one is more suitable at this point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pct1uEhAqBQ

[Anonymous No.12205010]

Does Starship even need a heatshield from LEO returns?

[Anonymous No.12205013]

>>12204991
It is obvoius that the faster you want something to be delivered the less economical it is. Rocket delivery is rational only when time is the only thing that matters.

[Anonymous No.12205014]

>>12205010
It IS the heat shield anon.

[Anonymous No.12205015]

>>12204994
I'm not complacent, I'm just not going to believe data provided by people who have never had any right to credibility in the first place. I'm going to go out and do my civic duty come November regardless of what any person, poll or pundit says, let the cards fall where they may.
If Harris gets in, things will become quite shit, I am preparing for that possibility, but I have seen no credible data to indicate that it is a probable outcome.

Make of that what you will, this is my last politics related post.

[Anonymous No.12205017]

>>12204997
Presumably any competent force would have AA coverage over any potential landing sites near the front. I think the farthest forward a Starship will ever get on purpose is a FOB or maybe an embassy evac.

[Anonymous No.12205018]

>>12204869
Propellants cost basically nothing. All of the cost of rocket launch vehicles comes from the extreme cost of fabricating a single-use vehicle that gets burned up on reentry and dumped in the ocean. If you have a vehicle that can be recovered in such a manner that it can be rapidly reflown, your launch costs drop down to close to the cost of propellant, which means a launch of a vehicle the size of Starship that puts >100 tons into LEO only costs a few million in total.

[Anonymous No.12205021]

>>12204991
Not the guy you're responding to but you are basically ignoring what he said which is pointing out the difference in capability and applicability to time limited operations. It's obvious that a jet is more efficient than a rocket.

[Anonymous No.12205027]

>>12204906
Like anywhere you get out what you put in. Part of me wishes I'd left when I was 18 as I'm too old to get a working visa for most places now, but then it's as expensive and pozzed everywhere in the English speaking world as far as I can figure out. Most of the world is a much, much, worse place to live than the UK.

[Anonymous No.12205034]

>>12205013
>>12204991
Not necessarily. Economies of fuel maybe much smaller importance than economies of having boots on the ground a day early. Each hour of delay can cost significant amount of delays in operations and thus total cost increase could be 10-100x more expensive to operate the C-17 compared to Starship where operation time is critical.

And there are no place on earth where operation time isn't critical, maybe except Europe with their slow ass beurocratic system.

[Anonymous No.12205035]

Solar powered Mercurian phosphorus forges when?

[Anonymous No.12205041]

>>12205010
Yes, LEO is ~7500 m/s, anything above ~3 km/s absolutely requires thermal protection coatings even if your vehicle is made of steel. Also, reentry thermal flux rises with something like the fourth power of the velocity, or something equally ridiculous like that. Going 7.5 km/s as opposed to 3 km/s is like 40x the thermal flux, ie you go from "the steel can handle it without eroding but aluminum can't" to "exposed tungsten will begin to ablate after about a minute of exposure".

[Anonymous No.12205044]

pence is a space fan, wonder if it will come up tonight

[Anonymous No.12205047]

>>12205044
If Kamala Harris says some bullshit about cutting NASA funding for gibs I'm going to make a Kamala Harris Memorial Station and crash it into the fucking Mun

[Anonymous No.12205048]

>>12205035
Based and 14.5 kW/m^2 mirror array pilled

[Anonymous No.12205050]

>>12205010
unshielded steel can survive reentry, just not in a reusable form.

[Anonymous No.12205063]

>>12205050
>This is the main propellant tank of the second stage of a Delta 2 launch vehicle which landed near Georgetown, TX, on 22 January 1997. This approximately 250 kg tank is primarily a stainless steel structure and survived reentry relatively intact.

Bonus:
>On 21 January 2001, a Delta 2 third stage, known as a PAM-D (Payload Assist Module - Delta), reentered the atmosphere over the Middle East. The titanium motor casing of the PAM-D, weighing about 70 kg, landed in Saudi Arabia about 240 km from the capital of Riyadh.

[Anonymous No.12205065]

>>12204765
Fuck that whore

[Anonymous No.12205069]

>>12205035
planets and moons in order of likely colonization dates (first permanent settlement)
>luna
>mars
>luna (chinese)
>ceres
>the rest of the belt
>the good Jovian moons
>the good Saturnian moons
>the shitty Jovian moons, except Io
>Mercury as an automated forgeworld
>luna (post-nuclear-war reconstruction)
>earth (return of humans)
>something in the Centauri system
>Venus (terraformed)

[Anonymous No.12205076]

>>12205069
If orbiting habitats count as settlements then Venus will happen after Mars and moon.

[Anonymous No.12205080]

SpaceX may become critical to US military success in the next 20 years. Starlink mega constellation for communications/surveillance. Starship for critical transport/logistics.

[Anonymous No.12205082]

>>12205063
>>On 21 January 2001, a Delta 2 third stage, known as a PAM-D (Payload Assist Module - Delta), reentered the atmosphere over the Middle East. The titanium motor casing of the PAM-D, weighing about 70 kg, landed in Saudi Arabia about 240 km from the capital of Riyadh.
Isn't that just a STAR-48 motor?

[Anonymous No.12205086]

>>12205069
Why the hell would you build an orbital settlement around Venus? Also O’Neil cylinders are still like a century or so away.

[Anonymous No.12205087]

>>12205076
I don't count orbital habitats because you can't do ISRU from orbit. Even a cloud city on Venus is just a space station with more steps.

[Anonymous No.12205091]

>>12204765
From what i’ve heard (albeit only here on /sfg/) this bitch is not only against human spaceflight but she hates robotic missions to other planets as well. Is this true?

[Anonymous No.12205100]

>>12205091
It doesn't matter because
>>12205080
is correct, which will provide SpaceX with a Lockheed tier pit of bottomless cash. Can you imagine SpaceX Skunkworks being funded like a defense bluechip? And once Lori Landingless gets humiliated by SpaceX putting astronauts on the Moon and Mars, not to mention CHYNA, she'll be booted.

[Anonymous No.12205112]

>>12202608
lmao

[Anonymous No.12205119]

>>12203351
Another addition to the rare earth hypothesis, I wonder if there are highly intelligent beings that cant get to space because their planet is just to damn big.

[Anonymous No.12205121]

>>12204785
Athletesf00t blown the fuck out lol

[Anonymous No.12205122]

>>12205080
Also saw a report that Starlink could be used for navigation and more accurately than GPS, making it even more valuable.

[Anonymous No.12205128]

>>12204878
Mostly fear mingering stemming from viral marketing. Tell space fans that Biden is bad for space in order to get them to vote Trump.
Where in reality the Obama/Biden administration increased Nasa's budget and helped get SpaceX into business.

[Anonymous No.12205129]

>>12205069
Throw Triton in there as an outland where people can move to but can't come back, because plasma magnet sails let you get there but then you're stuck because the solar wind doesn't blow towards the Sun
Getting to Neptune would only take a few months, but getting back would take ~30 years. Therefore the colonization effort's big project would be to set up a GWe scale power supply to run a large particle beam array that would let them accelerate back in towards the Sun and cut the return trip from decades to a year or less. Going out there as part of the initial buildout teams would pretty much be a one way guaranteed ticket for a decade or two at least, assuming no setbacks and assuming that you packed a lot of good equipment with you.
The big draw of building this particle beam array at Neptune is that you can use it to push spacecraft from Neptune back in towards the Sun, which means you can use the solar wind to slow down at your target, which means you can cut down trip times to Uranus and Saturn by a large amount (Jupiter will probably be faster to get to by taking a 'slow' plasma sail trajectory, turning the thing off before reaching even close to top speed for the first few dozen missions until you can get a particle beam decelerator array set up there as well, to allow high speed trips).

[Anonymous No.12205130]

>>12205119
Fuck bros this just made me think of a scenario where humans become the galaxies interstellar species and we are the alien invades of many primitive planets. Why are humans always the underdog in sci fi?

[Anonymous No.12205139]

>>12205082
one variant of it, yeah

>>12205091
lori garver made some comments in the past about how nasa needs to emphasize earth science and global warming over exploration but i don't really take that seriously. it's just something you need to say when you're a democrat trying to advance your political career. lately she's been pro-spacex in her public statements https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/372994-spacex-could-save-nasa-and-the-future-of-space-exploration?amp

biden himself has no interest in space one way or the other.

[Anonymous No.12205140]

>>12205119
If they're as bright as us they could get to space easily with nuclear rocketry, if their planet is so heavy even a nuclear rocket can't leave it then that isn't an Earth-like planet at all and wouldn't be spawning Earth-like species to invent space programs.

[Anonymous No.12205144]

>>12205130
that's just Star Wars

[Anonymous No.12205148]

>>12205128
are you one of those guys who refuse to admit that the obama administration didnt give a flying fuck about space?

[Anonymous No.12205151]

>>12205128
As I said last thread, it's not biden thats opposed to space exploration but the democratic congress. They're the ones who voted to deny nasa funding.

[Anonymous No.12205154]

>>12205129
What we need to be focusing on right now in the unmanned spaceflight sector is developing plasma sail tech demonstration probes that prove the technology works, then a second generation of more expensive probes that can be sent out to perform some missions and get science returns as well as fully flesh out the hardware. For the low cost V0.9 demo probes we'd be talking something with a ~5 kW solar array, a plasma magnet sail, and the computers and star trackers and things required to keep the thing operational. We turn it on low power, check that everything's working, ramp the power up until eventually we've got that thing accelerating at 50 cm/s^2, and we let it run until it goes out too far to run the thruster, at which point we switch to analyzing the data returned and roll those insights into the next generation of probes.
The generation 1.0 probes are gonna use solar arrays for boost power with mainline kilopower reactors for energy farther from the Sun. These probes are gonna be designed to try to get up to the speed of the solar wind, ie >400 km/s, and we're going to use them to do things like study the heliopause, fly by kuiper belt objects (think New Horizons but the flyby events happen less than a year after launch), and of course attempt the braking maneuver at Neptune to make sure that works.

This tech will roll handily into the manned exploration and colonization programs too, because it will allow us to send vehicles from high Earth orbit (beyond the magnetosphere) onto intercept trajectories with any planet or other object basically for the cost of the mass fraction of the power supply and plasma sail magnet. The ability to effectively haul fully-fueled chemical rockets to the target's sphere of influence is a huge deal, because it would let us stretch the delta V budget of those chemical vehicles a lot further, kinda like how aerobraking at Mars lets us cheat the rocket equation.

[Anonymous No.12205156]

>>12205128
Adjusting for inflation Obama did not increase NASA's budget. It went from $19.7b in 2008 to $19.037b in 2016 (and was below $18b from 2011-2015). It also declined from 0.6% of the federal budget to 0.5%.

[Anonymous No.12205164]

>>12205156
He took a lot of money away from oldspace and towards newspace tho

[Anonymous No.12205171]

>>12204785
Jazz and ODST's anywhere in the world in under an hour

[Anonymous No.12205175]

>>12205140
Do you mean nuclear thermal rockets or orion pulse drives? If you mean the latter that's still effectively a total shutout from space access because first of all, nobody is going to decide that Orion pulse drives to achieve orbit would be worth it, and secondly, there's really no way to recover an Orion drive vehicle once it's in space, which means every single vehicle is a one-and-done thing which you can use until you run out of nukes. Sure, theoretically I could imagine aliens on some 1.5 g world using a big chungus chemical rocket booster to loft a nuclear pule vehicle into the upper atmosphere where it'll do less damage on its way to orbit, and I could see them using this technology to robotically explore their star system and maybe even perform a few crewed flights to other neighboring worlds, but they simply aren't going to be able to afford to sustain that effort long enough to get a self sustaining colony anywhere in their system on something with lower gravity. I mean hell, the Apollo program was a lot cheaper than this super-earth's space program would need to be, and that only managed to land a dozen people on our moon.
If you meant nuclear thermal rockets, they really aren't much benefit because the big issue with high-G orbital launch is the gravity losses eating your ass on the way up, and the only thing that helps you there is thrust to weight ratio. Nuclear thermal universally gets shittier TWR than chemical, so except for maybe the last km/s or so the additional efficiency of NTR is useless.
For high G worlds their only option for cheap space access is to jump from literally nothing straight to orbital rings suspended by matter inside moving very fast restrained by magnetic fields. That's a horrifically large technological leap to make.

[Anonymous No.12205177]

>>12205154
>more unmanned exploration
No.

[Anonymous No.12205190]

>>12205164
He threw some leftover money at spaceX from the massive paycheck he gave to boeing to make starliner, all this at the end of his last term so if it failed he was scott free and if it was a succes he could claim it was his legacy.
Nobody back then expected spaceX to succeed, now Dems&obama fanboys are trying to take credit for the succes of spaceX.

[Anonymous No.12205191]

>>12205175
See that’s the thing about the Fermi Paradox/Great Filter. We likely could have passed it. Life is probably super common in the universe (Millers-Urey Experiment), but it’s either stuck under ice or on a water world.

[Anonymous No.12205197]

here's your democracy, bro

[Anonymous No.12205198]

>>12205177
Don't worry anon, I'm proposing that unmanned program in the same spirit as the unmanned Starship testing program. Basically, hire SpaceX to build super cheap tech demonstration spacecraft that have prototype plasma magnet sails and launch them into heliocentric orbits to show the shit works. The send 'full scale' probes, effectively plasma magnet sail propulsion sections with no attached vehicle, to get that working. Phase three is installing plasma magnet sails on Starships that let them go basically anywhere in the solar system, with people.

[Anonymous No.12205200]

>>12205190
>saying the same thing anon said but in a more disparaging way so it seems worse
It's still true that SpaceX had a massive amount of funding during Obama/Biden. Call it a coincidence if you want.

[Anonymous No.12205201]

>>12205190
Bush and him both wanted more privatization as a way to get shit done on a smaller budget.

Especially after the recession, Obama cancelled the shuttle without a successor largely because he wanted private industry to fill the gap.

He hasn't been that gung ho about space but he isn't against it either.

[Anonymous No.12205202]

>>12205197
How is this related? Is it they're breathing the same air as we are that this is now space related?

[Anonymous No.12205204]

>>12205177
A 10cm plasma magnet sail attached to a 2500kg probe can drop into orbit around Neptune in four months. That's totally worth it to send a few.

[Anonymous No.12205205]

>>12205191
My bet is that microscopic life is common but multicelluar life is not, and intelligence is even more rare.

[Anonymous No.12205219]

>>12205202
wrong thread desu famalam

[Anonymous No.12205220]

>>12205204
Exactly. The best part is, if the 5g sustained braking maneuver at Neptune freaks you out, just turn the sail off before you reach top speed on the way out and you directly cut down on the intensity of the braking maneuver for the tradeoff of a longer coasting period. Two years would not be impractical to wait for a Neptune orbiter to arrive. In fact, may as well send two at once, Alpha at top speed and Beta at a more conservative coasting speed just to guarantee results.

[Anonymous No.12205225]

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1313944224937783297

More rural areas using Starlink

[Anonymous No.12205236]

>>12205128
t. shitposting connoisseur

[Anonymous No.12205238]

How close are we to low-boiloff hydrolox storage in space? All the pictures look nice and all but if a certain senator died could we have it operational in 5 years? 10?

[Anonymous No.12205243]

>>12205238
It could be operational in a year if anyone cared enough to throw money at the problem. But what hydrolox spacecraft exist which it could refuel?

[Anonymous No.12205245]

>>12205243
carbon fiber starship

[Anonymous No.12205247]

>>12205225
The internet is about to be flooded with so many rural people who never had good internet before. Should be entertaining at least.

[Anonymous No.12205248]

>>12205238
>ULA cancels the only cool thing they have going for them

[Anonymous No.12205254]

>>12205247
Now mind viruses can spread even to rural areas.

[Anonymous No.12205255]

>>12205245
Carbon fiber is bad at holding LOX much less LH2

[Anonymous No.12205257]

>>12205225

I got goosebumps watching that. Seriously, Starlink is barely in operation and it allready has drasticaly changed people's lives for the better.

[Anonymous No.12205264]

>Aspiring to have no flame diverter in Boca, but this could turn out to be a mistake

[Anonymous No.12205265]

>>12205254
>All these poor clueless rural farmer parents who's sons and daughters are gonna start picking up internet lingo, and using discord, and seeing tranny hypno porn, and reading autistic japanese hentai.
A pandora's box is about to open, finally it will be unleashed on the whole world.

[Anonymous No.12205267]

>>12205225
Context: the Hoh tribe is in a cloudy temperate rainforest hard up against the Olympic mountains. It's basically a worst case scenario for satellite comms.

[Anonymous No.12205269]

>>12205257
Yep. People without any proper internet will now have proper highspeed internet access 24/7.

Yeah I know they had "Hughesnet" and other bullshit. But who the fuck gives a fuck about 1000+ ms satellite internet that has 20GB monthly bandwidth limit and charges $100+ per month?

[Anonymous No.12205274]

>>12205265
psh, i did all that from a rural farm with hughesnet. if they need latencies below 2 seconds they haven't earned it.

[Anonymous No.12205277]

>>12205255
just cover it in foam insulation

[Anonymous No.12205280]

>Military will be flying shit across the world in Starships
>Musks internet will have everyone uploaded
>Cities on Mars, colonies on the Moon most likely
>Tesla technology to help people tear up dirt offworld
This is just the bare minimum and it could all come true. I don't think he is peddling snake oil. Neuralink seems kind of strange to me but even if that works at the bare minimum and the boring company doesn't go anywhere, Musk has already set Von Braun level goals and so far it is all tangible for us to see. When did we switch to the good timeline?

[Anonymous No.12205286]

all the shitty satellite internet provides going bust when bros?

[Anonymous No.12205288]

>>12205286
When their neighbors talk to one another and find out how Starlink's internet is 100x better. They're ready to ditch Hughesnet at a moment's notice.

[Anonymous No.12205296]

>>12205288
This is accounting for Hughesnet cancellation fees because they require you to sign contracts. Fucking shit company.

[Anonymous No.12205299]

How does he pull off the midwest farm boy train enthusiast aesthetic so perfectly bro?

[Anonymous No.12205303]

>>12205286
Imagine everywhere else in the world has smartphones, but the only access your town has to any form of cellphones is the old blocky cellphones from the 80s. Now suddenly a company has the ability to provide your town with smartphones. How quickly do you think your local 80s cellphone provider will go out of business?

[Anonymous No.12205305]

>>12205280
This isn't happening.....Thunderf00t said it could never happen

[Anonymous No.12205314]

>>12205130
Because being the underdog has been made into the cool thing that everyone should want to be as opposed to the grizzled, self-deterministic pioneer that was previously, before movies were super wide-spread. Also because unless you made the aliens super cute or sexy then the average moviegoer wouldn't give a shit about them getting massacred on a planetary scale.
>>12205280
Neuralink is generally just miniaturization of already existing technologies for the most part. Though that's still huge because it allows fixes for serious injuries that were previously infeasible to use in everyday life to be used in the same way that Pacemakers or insulin pumps are.

[Anonymous No.12205317]

>>12205305
Make a list. We shall blacklist the nonbelievers once we have thriving cities and all they want to go after we busted our ass to make it nice. Urf fags get OUT

[Anonymous No.12205319]

>>12205305
Its sad the guy has managed to brainwash/con so many people.

[Anonymous No.12205329]

>>12205314
Neuralink is another space-adjacent company. Imagine having everything metabolic including brain activity slowed to 1% of normal during long term cryosleep, but connected to Neuralink for VRMMOs at perceived real time speeds. Neuralink makes sleeper ships a real possibility. This isn't even about interstellar stuff yet, it's about slow boats to the outer planets in case nuclear propulsion doesn't work out.

[Anonymous No.12205333]

>>12205299
Why are you such a queer bait friendo?

[Anonymous No.12205339]

>>12205329
For interstellar, Orion drives constructed on Mars are by far the GOAT technology.

[Anonymous No.12205344]

>>12205339
Less fucks to give about fallout. It would certainly leave mars gravity in a hurry

[Anonymous No.12205346]

>>12205329
Yeah but Neuralink isn't anywhere near capable of that sort of stuff. Also you wouldn't be able to slow the whole body like that to effectively extend lifespans because many things in the body run pretty much completely independently of the brain. I also think Neuralink being something for bodily enhancement and VR stuff is super pop-sci "wow it's just like cool future cyberpunk dystopian movie" tier thinking.

[Anonymous No.12205348]

>>12205339
Imagine being an earthnigger when the Martian forgeworld is going full tilt

[Anonymous No.12205352]

>>12204785
Damn, the military seems absolute diamonds over SpaceX recently. Starlink being used as enhanced GPS, Starlink-derived infrared missile-launch monitoring, and now this.

[Anonymous No.12205355]

>>12205329
Thats an application I haven't thought of, but makes sense. It would make sense even for "short" travels like Mars-Earth 6 month travel. That is if the technology gets there.

[Anonymous No.12205358]

>>12205352
Global coverage of Starlink is moving fast, so this is military trying to catch up to SpaceX's rapid innovation.

[Anonymous No.12205365]

>>12205352
>Starlink-derived infrared missile-launch monitoring
Calling it now, Starlink-derived Brilliant Pebbles in less than a decade.

[Anonymous No.12205382]

starlink-derived weather control satellites when?

[Anonymous No.12205397]

Do y'all keep the Labpadre stream open all day? I keep it on my second monitor. I really hope there is a 24 hour lunar livestream provided by NASA or SpaceX in a few years

[Anonymous No.12205404]

>>12205382
When the legacy weather control satellites need to be retired.

[Anonymous No.12205407]

>>12205397
No

[Anonymous No.12205412]

>>12205397
A livestream broadcasting from LOP-G as it gets closer and farther from the moon would be kino

[Anonymous No.12205417]

>>12205305
Who?

[Anonymous No.12205419]

>>12205412
LUNAR ORBIT TOLLBOOTH
SAY IT WITH ME

[Anonymous No.12205423]

>>12205417
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4KR4-TN-Yo
Honestly I think he's based because he makes Elon fanatics wince

[Anonymous No.12205426]

>>12205423
I ain't watching a 20 minute long video.
Why does this make elon fanatics wince?

[Anonymous No.12205430]

>>12205426
It doesn't

[Anonymous No.12205436]

>>12205430
Then why the fuck did you link it?
What about him does make them wince then?

[Anonymous No.12205437]

here's your space program bro

[Anonymous No.12205438]

>>12205426
He always claims every one of Elon's projects are wrong. Always gets proven wrong. Brainlets still listen to this cuck like he's smart.

Its also cringe worthy not because his criticism of Musk projects, but rather how stupid many of his arguments are. Arguments that could be corrected with simple google search to pull up the source of his strawman that he's building up. His shoddy analysis is more of a problem than his issue with Musk is.

[Anonymous No.12205445]

>>12205438
Why does he think all of elons projects are wrong?

[Anonymous No.12205446]

>>12205437

[Anonymous No.12205447]

>>12205436
she didnt link it, I linked it

[Anonymous No.12205452]

>>12205447
>she
anon I'm sorry to disappoint

[Anonymous No.12205455]

>>12205445
Because he's actually educated, unlike Elon. Phil Mason is a scientist, he knows point to point could never work. It's just too loud, and rockets blow up. Watch these videos of rockets blowing up. Also you need to take a boat to the ship? LOL boats. Overall, rockets are too loud, Elon's head is in the clouds. Come back to reality, Elon fans, you might not like it but it's better than living in Elon's pop science fantasy.
t. hunderf00t

[Anonymous No.12205457]

how do I get government money to build model rockets bros

[Anonymous No.12205458]

>>12205445
Strawman that he's either building up to build his base/argument for views or he genuinely believes his shoddy own analysis in which case he's a brainlet.

Plus there's some weird way Musk attracts midwits skepticisms regularly.

[Anonymous No.12205460]

>>12205452
whoops, i meant personned

[Anonymous No.12205469]

>>12205455
>>12205458
So what, he doesn't have any actual arguments and just whinges about musk for 20 minutes a video?
Why would that make anyone here wince? Or do you mean everyone here considers thunderf00t cringe?

[Anonymous No.12205470]

>>12205445
probably just for views honestly. he's a washed up bygone atheist youtuber that made a little money from being controversial and "debunking" videos. it's honest work

[Anonymous No.12205472]

>>12205469
Have you ever argued with people who makes strawman arguments and continue to use it when pointed out?

[Anonymous No.12205476]

>>12205469
The second one!

[Anonymous No.12205479]

>>12205472
Has anyone done I debunking of his debunkings? I kinda wanna see that now

[Anonymous No.12205483]

>>12205479
IDK, but whatever his arguments are, you can factcheck them yourself with bit more reading.

[Anonymous No.12205484]

jap spacex instead of autistic baby SLS when?

[Anonymous No.12205488]

>>12204431
>naming your plane "Boom"

[Anonymous No.12205489]

>>12205479
Yeah people debunk his shit all the time (including musk by just simply doing the things thunderf00t says he can't do like reusable rockets), but they don't get attention. Thundy has a following because he spent a lot of his time years ago "owning sjws and creationists", and he used the fact that he's a """"""scientist"""""" to gain credibility, so a lot of his critics just get drowned out by them being small youtube channels or whatever. And anyone with a big following would never waste their time on someone like thuderf00t

[Anonymous No.12205490]

>>12205484
Probably never. Japan is way too set in their seniority hierarchy ways to even consider thinking new.

[Anonymous No.12205494]

I wish early avionics weren't such a bitch in RO. 6 ton stage with 500kg of avionics, pls no.

[Anonymous No.12205496]

>>12205483
Nah, fuck that
>>12205489
Got any links to these small time debunkers?

[Anonymous No.12205497]

>>12205494
just angle ur launch bro

[Anonymous No.12205508]

>>12205497
It's the second stage where the avionics weight is a bitch, first stage is way less weight sensitive, third and fourth stages are spin stabilized

[Anonymous No.12205509]

Down to 4 boyos
How many more are gonna be delayed?

[Anonymous No.12205513]

>>12205508
yeah but with enough autistic trial and error and some fins you can set the launch angle so the whole thing flies to orbit unguided

[Anonymous No.12205514]

>>12205496
bruh you are the laziest son of a bitch

[Anonymous No.12205517]

>>12205514
You got any links disproving this guy or not?

[Anonymous No.12205518]

>>12205509
1 success
1 explosion
2 scrubs

[Anonymous No.12205519]

>>12205509
the 15th dates were just placeholders anyway, not sure why you're even paying attention to them

[Anonymous No.12205521]

>>12205517
Nope, everything he said in the video is 100% true, which is why is makes SpaceX tards wince

[Anonymous No.12205525]

>>12205521
Figures these fanboys were just coping

[Anonymous No.12205528]

>>12205346
>Yeah but Neuralink isn't anywhere near capable of that sort of stuff
yet
If Musk is genuinely going for a Mars colony (he is), he's got to be planning at least several decades ahead with his goals. Why wait until years after you'd need something like Nueralink when you know you'll need it eventually anyway and can develop it ahead of time?

[Anonymous No.12205532]

here's how you debunk blunderfoot's E2E video:
https://spacenews.com/u-s-transportation-command-to-study-use-of-spacex-rockets-to-move-cargo-around-the-world/
you just fucking ignore the youtube nerds and do the thing

[Anonymous No.12205545]

>>12205517
i watched it a few threads ago and here are some of his claims:

>Arianne 5 costs $10k/kg so therefore Starship will too
>Shuttle would have cost $1m/passenger so therefore Starship will too
>Shuttle reentry took 30 minutes so therefore Starship will too
>E2E only takes 1/4 the energy of going to orbit
>ICBMs can do 30 minute E2E but they go faster than other rockets

he clearly has no understanding of basic rocketry, orbital mechanics, or that spacex is attempting to reduce launch costs. any random kerbal player who spent an hour on wikipedia could have made a better-informed video.

[Anonymous No.12205547]

>>12205517
If you're so interested present the actual argument. I'm not watching that shit and I'm not relying on someone to be a mouthpiece.

[Anonymous No.12205561]

TSTO spaceplanes any day now!

[Anonymous No.12205562]

>>12205547
Don't ask me to watch some nerds 20 minute cope about how much more successful musk is than him

[Anonymous No.12205563]

>>12205528
Musk is 50, assuming SpaceX takes ~10 years to build out rudimentary Mars colony. He'll be 60 when he leaves Earth. He might live another 30-60 years depending on how Mars grows.

[Anonymous No.12205569]

>>12205563
>musk could live to be 60
That seems overly optimistic anon

[Anonymous No.12205571]

>>12205569
30-60. Its a range. If you didn't know.

[Anonymous No.12205577]

>>12205528
Hoping for that level of brain/computer interfacing and computational capability is wishful thinking. You'd have to nail basically every way the brain thinks down to which neurons think which specific abstract thoughts from person to person to be able to even hope to get anywhere close to that. The reason Neuralink and other such current things work is because they read signals from the brain that are for movement of muscles throughout the body, which are magnitudes more clear and easy to understand than abstract thoughts. It's certainly theoretically possible to do, but is pretty much on the same level as removing a person's brain and making it function entirely through artificial support, something that we've constantly found to be significantly harder than previously believed at every step of the way. That's all without taking into consideration what making someone experience a VR setting directly through their brain would entail through having it completely override your real physical movements and also effectively making you experience the most extreme levels of hallucinations possible. And what of the security risks? It being able to do the aforementioned would make it well within its capabilities to completely control someone's mind and body. It would be susceptible to being hacked, which having even the tiniest security breach for even the smallest fraction of a second could mean stakes even higher than life-or-death. Hell, you posted a pic from SAO, a show about that very thing.

[Anonymous No.12205579]

>>12205296
Musk could offer to pay it off if you take a starlink subscription as an additional fuck you to price gougers.

[Anonymous No.12205580]

>>12205545
That sounds retarded
Can any anon confirm or is this guy just making up shit?

[Anonymous No.12205583]

>>12205528
>>12205577
Also forgot- that still doesn't solve the issue of Neuralink not being able to pause a person's aging.

[Anonymous No.12205584]

>>12205299

>if big jim had been running nasa in 2014 the winners of commercial crew would have been dragon and dreamchaser

[Anonymous No.12205585]

>>12205562
Indeed, you've spent more than 20min bitching that you wont

[Anonymous No.12205593]

>>12205545
So it's another video where Thundercunt should have shut the fuck up and gone back to doing some video on whatever fucking narrow field he actually has any knowledge about?
As expected then.

Ariane 5 is an extremely expensive hydrolox rocket with parts made by every fucking European country ever. Not comparable.
Shuttle was a fucking glider and did not use the same descent trajectory, also it used SRBs and hydrolox. Not comparable.
Yes, ICBMs are fast, Starship will also be fast, but not quite so fast. hour or two vs half an hour. It's a bit bigger than an ICBM and it's not just dropping a fucking nuke bus.

[Anonymous No.12205595]

>>12205585
you spent 20 minutes bitching at me

[Anonymous No.12205598]

>>12205579
lol Hughestnet would throw a hissyfit in court if that happens.

[Anonymous No.12205599]

>>12205580
same guy, i can confirm. read the transcript you double nigger: https://pastebin.com/kiH2JcXd

[Anonymous No.12205601]

>>12205599
Thanks bro
Reading is way better than videos

[Anonymous No.12205604]

>>12205599
No, anon. Can you read it to me?

[Anonymous No.12205607]

>>12205599
>sure elon musk managed to land some rockets for the idea of reusable spacecraft which is a great idea unfortunately it was explored decades ago with this space shuttle
He's still going on about that fucking shit?
Jesus fuck. I stopped reading right there. The man was so fucking rekt by his bullshit in the past regarding this and he's not giving up on it?

[Anonymous No.12205609]

>>12205604
Naw fuck that, I can read faster than any dipshit can talk

[Anonymous No.12205615]

>>12205599
Okay when he talks about the fucking space shuttle in regards to the dangers of rocket travel is the point at which I write this guy off as a midwit talking shit about something he doesn't understand.
What a fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.12205631]

i always thought settling propellant would be a big issue for depots but reading through the ULA paper on them they're saying hydrolox only needs 10^-5 G to stay settled. for an ACES-sized stage that would only take 10 rotations per hour so that wouldn't be hard to dock with at all

>>12205593
ICBMs accelerate faster but their ballistic trajectories would be identical to the ones starship takes, so the difference in travel time wouldn't be more than a few minutes. ICBMs have to stay slower than orbital velocity or else they'd never come down.

[Anonymous No.12205632]

>>12205599
The best part of his videos is when he shows videos of DC-X
>BAZINGA Elon didn't invent landing rockets! DEBUMPKED, patreon to the left
DC-X really did make waves huh bros, where would SpaceX be without DC-X

[Anonymous No.12205636]

Is Musk an atheist?

[Anonymous No.12205640]

when

[Anonymous No.12205642]

>>12205632
People always bring up DC-X for SpaceX's accomplishment. They never mention that DC-X employees went to work with BlueOrigin. We can see the DC-X influence in BlueOrigin landing style of slow hover landing vs SpaceX's perfected fast hoverslam.

Did SpaceX get landing technology from DC-X? I never got any answers.

[Anonymous No.12205643]

>>12205599
>this took 21 minutes
He's a master of padding at least kek.
The one salient point he really has is noise, but then he counteracts that by talking about how remote the launch site is (which is obviously a measure against noise constraints, and renders moot his 'this is literally hiroshima' arguments).
Quasi-plausible arguments are the kaboom obsession (there's only one answer, same as planes: mastery of the craft, you can't eliminate potential energy but you can not blow up to begin with), and weather (SS should be weather tolerant by design, but that remains to be seen in practise)

[Anonymous No.12205644]

>>12205640
dragon capsule aerospike ssto?

[Anonymous No.12205649]

>>12205640
>expendable launch facilities

[Anonymous No.12205650]

>>12205636
Elon is a member of the machine cult

[Anonymous No.12205655]

>>12205642
>>12205632

if VTOL tests in the desert are on the same level as a reusable orbital rocket then they could go back way further to own elon if they wanted to

[Anonymous No.12205659]

Off to orbit we go

[Anonymous No.12205662]

>>12205655
I bet that thing would be fun as hell in KSP

[Anonymous No.12205663]

>>12205640
titty the rocket

[Anonymous No.12205666]

>>12205649
>>12205644
any decade now!

[Anonymous No.12205667]

>>12205659

[Anonymous No.12205669]

>>12205636
Yes like nearly any intelligent person

[Anonymous No.12205683]

>>12205667
>it still only has a twr of 1.4
>with 9 F-1 engines and 10 massive SRB's
>30 000 kn of thrust
>1.4

[Anonymous No.12205693]

>https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2020/09/15/the-us-air-force-has-built-and-flown-a-mysterious-full-scale-prototype-of-its-future-fighter-jet/
>“I have to imagine there will be a lot of engineers — maybe famous ones with well-known household names with billions of dollars to invest — that will decide starting the world’s greatest aircraft company to build the world’s greatest aircraft with the Air Force is exactly the kind of inspiring thing they want to do as a hobby or even a main gig,” Roper said.
And its for the Next Generation Air Dominance program from Air Force.

I was reading the other SpaceNews articles and found this interesting article. Specifically hinting at Musk to join the new fighter jet program.

[Anonymous No.12205719]

>>12205693
Well, Elon does seem to be working pretty hard to butter up the airforce, and considering how badly Boing! and co are slipping in terms of doing a good job for a fair price I wouldn't be surprised at some point if the military at least asks him to propose some designs.

[Anonymous No.12205721]

>>12205693
>For the Air Force, the turning point is when an aircraft hits 15 years old. At that age, maintenance costs compound rapidly, growing another 3-7 percent every year, Roper wrote in a Sept. 15 document titled “Take the Red Pill: The New Digital Acquisition Reality.”
uh oh bros this sounds pretty racist to me

[Anonymous No.12205727]

>>12205721
It’s actually a matrix-themed publication, complete with green text on a black background iirc. Kinda funny.

[Anonymous No.12205729]

>>12205721
>15 year old
Pedophile
>Roper
Racist
>Red Pill
Alt Right BS

[Anonymous No.12205738]

>>12205693
Can't really see much technical input on the airframe or anything, but almost certainly starlink integration and maybe neurallink integration as well?

[Anonymous No.12205747]

>>12205721
I love the 21st century

[Anonymous No.12205764]

>>12205738
>neuralink controlled AI stealth drone wingman program
everything I just said already exists, pic related, search terms Skyborg (yes really), Loyal Wingman and "attritable drones"

[Anonymous No.12205778]

Oh for Boca Chica residents, I think they're in the final run up before eminent domain. SpaceX made their last offer recently. Then the county will do eminent domain and take over the land at the appraised value. SpaceX can't launch their SuperHeavy tests due to residents nearby. The single engine Starship was already shaking the neighborhood with the noise/vibrations. 28 engine Superheavy will be a killer.

I suspect no more than ~2 more months left for the remaining residents who still aren't taking the offers.

[Anonymous No.12205801]

>>12205778
Also 2months is based on Superheavy launch window taking shape. ~1-2 month from now is when superheavy stacking will begin. which will likely launch ~2-3 months from now is when they'll start testing/static fire.

[Anonymous No.12205802]

>>12205778
??? afaik all residents sold a while ago

[Anonymous No.12205811]

>>12205802
Handful left and haven't sold.

[Anonymous No.12205842]

>>12205802
>>12205811
If you watch that Vice documentary you get to meet them lol

[Anonymous No.12205859]

>>12205842
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqAcMP3a3bg

[Anonymous No.12205885]

*pomf*

[Anonymous No.12205888]

reinstalling RP1 so i might as well dump the two decent screenshots i got from this playthrough for posterity

[Anonymous No.12205892]

6 planets aligned during a lunar sample return

[Anonymous No.12205916]

Seems like military's interest in p2p rockets kinda implies there's no classified antigravity or hypersonic craft in existence that can meet the same requirements. Either they dont exist or they're not as useful for logistics.

[Anonymous No.12205949]

>>12205859
Wheres the full documentary? Cant' get the video playing on official vicetv site. Any third party uploads?

[Anonymous No.12206005]

>>12202495
You must be some kind of unique retard autist to hate felix.
He's trillions times better than Estronaut and Hullo-man

[Anonymous No.12206008]

>>12204851
>OwO what is this stick for?
Last words by Alsbury

[Anonymous No.12206022]

>>12204897
kino as fuck
>>12204910
Soviets loved their little badges, I found a little banner with some on it (just general commie stuff, not space), about half had already been taken though.

[Anonymous No.12206027]

>>12204910
kek

[Anonymous No.12206056]

Post yfw Starship does ass to ass refueling

[Anonymous No.12206059]

>>12206056

[Anonymous No.12206066]

>>12206056

[Anonymous No.12206071]

[Anonymous No.12206074]

[Anonymous No.12206075]

[Anonymous No.12206076]

[Anonymous No.12206108]

>>12206056

[Anonymous No.12206112]

scientifically speaking, there is no legitimate reason to leave earth

[Anonymous No.12206117]

>>12206112
based earthnigger

[Anonymous No.12206119]

>>12206112
pseudoscientifically of course

[Anonymous No.12206121]

>>12206112
scientifically speaking, there was no reason to stay here in the first place

[Anonymous No.12206132]

>>12206112
scientifically speaking there is no legitimate reason to do anything, and yet we do
because science is a tool that we use to gather data about our surroundings, not a device that we use to make decisions
retard

[Anonymous No.12206139]

>>12206112
scientifically speaking, you're a homosexual

[Anonymous No.12206140]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1Sq1Nr58hM

[Anonymous No.12206146]

>>12206112
scientifically speaking, you're a nigger

[Anonymous No.12206150]

>>12206112
scientifically speaking, you are wrong

[Anonymous No.12206155]

>>12206154
new thread

[Anonymous No.12206161]

>>12206155
NOT UNTIL PAGE 10 YOU WON'T

[Anonymous No.12206165]

>>12206161
it's page 10 now

[Anonymous No.12206172]

>>12206161
It is page 10 faggot

[Anonymous No.12206186]

>>12206056

[Anonymous No.12206190]

Page 10 is here, yet there's no good thread in sight. fuck it.
>>12206185
>>12206185
>>12206185
>>12206185

[Anonymous No.12206200]

>>12206190
nigger lol

[Anonymous No.12206254]

>>12206056

[Anonymous No.12206531]

>>12203020
Is there a toilet onboard?

[Anonymous No.12206535]

>>12203489
Based shelbyposting

[Anonymous No.12206549]

>>12203489
>>12204776
Based shelbyposting