/sfg/ - Space Flight General:

[Anonymous No.12579751]

Anything is possible edition
Previous >>12577701

>SN9 static fires multiple times in one day
>SN9 hop soon
>Next planned rocket launch: Electron on Jan 16
>Next planned Falcon 9 launch: Starlink on Jan 17
>Also planned on Jan 17: Virgin Orbit with LauncherOne
>SLS status: overbudget and behind schedule
>BO status: New Shepard launch on Jan 14 at 0945 Central Time (suborbital)

[Anonymous No.12579759]

Daily reminder to play Outer Wilds for comfy spaceflight times

[Anonymous No.12579764]

>I want to BLEVE

[Anonymous No.12579768]

>>12579764
Kek always funny

[Anonymous No.12579769]

>page 9
page 9
>page 9
page 9
>page 9
page 9
>page 9
page 9
>page 9
page 9
>page 9
page 9
>page 9
page 9

[Anonymous No.12579770]

Threadly reminder to ignore and report any furries that show up.

[Anonymous No.12579771]

>>12579751
Did SN9 get hurt? Will they have to replace a Raptor?

[Anonymous No.12579772]

>>12579770
Disgusting bigot

[Anonymous No.12579773]

>>12579764
Requesting an edit with SN4 exploding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIh4aLX3cZQ

[Anonymous No.12579774]

>>12579751
First for TRAPPIST-1 being the comfiest system

[Anonymous No.12579775]

Krystal lol

[Anonymous No.12579779]

>>12579769
the best page to make a thread on

[Anonymous No.12579781]

Threadly reminder to ignore and report any 2hu niggers that show up.

[Anonymous No.12579784]

[Anonymous No.12579790]

>>12579774
Trappist-1 has awful stellar activity that would strip the atmosphere away from any potentially habitable world and make it a giant version of the moon. Lutyen b (Gj 273 b) is a much more likely world. It is 2.89X the mass of the Earth and has only 6% more stellar flux meaning that we know it’s likely not like Venus. Even better, it orbits a “Quiet” red dwarf which doesn’t rape its atmosphere like Trappist’s does.

>”Unlike many other potentially habitable exoplanets orbiting red dwarfs, like Proxima b and the TRAPPIST-1 planets, Luyten b has the advantage of orbiting a very quiet host. Luyten's Star has a very long rotational period of 118 days and is not prone to powerful solar flares. Strong enough flare events can strip the atmospheres of orbiting planets and eliminate their chances of habitability; a good example of this is Kepler-438b. However, with the low activity of its host, Luyten b is likely to retain any atmosphere for billions of years, potentially enabling the development of life as we know it.”

[Anonymous No.12579792]

>>12579771
Nothing can hurt SN9. She's fine.

[Anonymous No.12579793]

>>12579774
Smol system
Visit a different planet every week

[Anonymous No.12579795]

>>12579790
Alter the star to be nicer

[Anonymous No.12579799]

>>12579795
The planets around Trappist are probably airless worlds.

[Anonymous No.12579801]

>>12579790
Airless worlds just mean we can make our own habitats

[Anonymous No.12579805]

>>12579801
actually it means you can't land on them, because we need an atmosphere to land on worlds that large

[Anonymous No.12579806]

>>12579801
So why go through all the trouble traveling 40 light years when you could just build domes on asteroids around Proxima Centauri

[Anonymous No.12579808]

>>12579806
To get away from you-know-who

[Anonymous No.12579809]

>>12579805
If you have a drive powerful and efficient enough to get you to another star in a reasonable amount of time, I doubt you'll have too much trouble propulsively landing on an airless world with 1g of gravity.

[Anonymous No.12579811]

>>12579790
This is such a retarded meme invented by "scientists" who are eternal doomers. They dont know shit about these worlds other than their apparent size. anything else is just fucking noise

[Anonymous No.12579812]

>>12579769
Literally shut the fuck up with this autism

[Anonymous No.12579813]

>>12579808
Trump?

[Anonymous No.12579814]

Krystal makes my pp hard

[Anonymous No.12579815]

>>12579811
This, besides even if the worlds are shitty when we arrive, as an interstellar civilization it will be trivial and mostly a matter of inconvenience and boring busywork to fix them to our liking.

[Anonymous No.12579816]

>>12579812
Not figuratively? I don't think he was yelling "page nine!" at himself in the dark anon.

[Anonymous No.12579817]

>>12579811
Wtf you retarded faggot there are several worlds even closer than TRAPPIST that don’t have a shitty damn star. Going at 10% the speed of light we could reach Luyten b in 120 years. It would take centuries to reach TRAPPIST

[Anonymous No.12579818]

>>12579816

[Anonymous No.12579823]

>>12579790
You do realise that a planet with nearly 3 times the mass of ours is going to have absolutely intolerable gravity? Assuming of course it isn’t some kind of small gas planet or Venus like world.

If the worlds in Trappist 1 were like the moon just earth sized then that would be absolutely wonderful. It would basically be Mars so not very hard to colonise and given their proximity to each other you could easily start trade between colonies.

It’s a very appealing system.

[Anonymous No.12579824]

>>12579799
Like that’d be a problem if we could fly forty fucking light years

[Anonymous No.12579828]

>>12579806
The further away from earth you can get, the better.

[Anonymous No.12579830]

>>12579816
this post made me rethink life

[Anonymous No.12579831]

>>12579805
What are you talking about? What stops you from landing on an airless world? We have already done it several times on Mars and the moon with craft so I have no idea what you are talking about.

[Anonymous No.12579834]

>>12579817
Don't ever reply to me again

[Anonymous No.12579835]

with this launch BO will MATCH their 2020 new Shepard launch record for 2021! https://youtu.be/g9oTZu2HP8U

[Anonymous No.12579841]

>>12579831
The more massive the world, the greater your orbital velocity is, and therefore the more you need to kill off to land. Besides, Mars has a rather substantial atmosphere which is typically exploited to slow down from orbit.

[Anonymous No.12579843]

>>12579809
ah yeah that's true
and if there's no atmosphere, the Orion drive will work for landing too
maybe bring some chemical thrusters for the last bit

[Anonymous No.12579847]

>>12579817
Luyten is closer to Earth so that’s a bad idea.
Fuck it. Aim for the Virgo Cluster

[Anonymous No.12579848]

>>12579841
I think you underestimate the insane efficiencies necessary for interstellar travel to work at all. braking wont be a problem whatsoever

[Anonymous No.12579852]

>>12579759
This.
>tfw no autistic space hippie goat wife
It hurts.

[Anonymous No.12579857]

>>12579848
Well yeah, but the post I replied to was a lot more general in scope. Go try doing a Tylo landing to see why high-g vacuum planets would be very problematic for conventional propulsion systems

[Anonymous No.12579859]

The New Glenn is a testament to all the hardworking Americans who have a dream, a dream of conquering galaxies and traveling the full lenght of the cosmos countless times. It's the sole proof that there are no boundaries left unscathed when Humanity's best are on board and our deepest interests as a species are on the line. It is the eventual germination of the seeds that the general public have0 sown, those seeds being their hopes and trust on a company that dares to aim higher than any other ever had willed, even hoped, to aim for. We deconstruct myth, and build the impossible. We at Blue Origin know what it takes to be the best: to be hired. The New Glenn will roar with might never before seen, and we'll be be there to make sure of it, sooner than you'd expect. The future is Blue, and we're it's Origin. Hail Bezos.

[Anonymous No.12579862]

>>12579835
Getting their yearly launch out of the way early I see.

[Anonymous No.12579863]

[Anonymous No.12579864]

>>12579857
We're talking about Zubrin's Nuclear Saltwater drive, my good man

[Anonymous No.12579868]

>>12579859
Woke Origin

[Anonymous No.12579872]

>>12579863
>realistic graphic of the ISS from the mid 90s
it takes the government way too long to build space things

[Anonymous No.12579873]

>other companies talk reuse
>SpaceX fires the rocket repeatedly without any refurb

Talk vs action

[Anonymous No.12579877]

>>12579843
Just use your high efficiency fusion reactors to power ultra-high-temperature resistojets, or use pulsed nuclear-thermal drives with water as their reaction mass, not ultra-efficient but they'll provide several thousand seconds of ISP with equal thrust to a chemical rocket.
Or who knows what. Maybe the time we're ready for regular, relatively safe interstellar travel enough to consider interstellar colonization we may have some kind of meme drive so powerful it renders almost any landing essentially trivial, maybe a pulsed closed cycle gas core nuclear drive that delivers 20kISP and a 1-200TWR or an afterburning fusion torch that's light enough to land a ship with.

[Anonymous No.12579880]

>>12579770
>he says to the thread of furries

[Anonymous No.12579886]

>>12579873
Does SpaceX refurb Merlins after static fires (before launch)?

Wonder what kind of refurb is needed after RS-68 fires and then scrubs lol

[Anonymous No.12579888]

Anyone got the audio from that ULA exec who was recorded seething about spacex years ago and then was fired? lmfao

[Anonymous No.12579889]

>>12579841
If you can travel across interstellar space then landing on some planet is not gonna be a problem.

[Anonymous No.12579890]

>>12579863
>non-cylindrical meme tank design

[Anonymous No.12579891]

>>12579872

[Anonymous No.12579892]

>>12579113
kinda reminded me of

[Anonymous No.12579895]

>>12579890
Jealous?

[Anonymous No.12579896]

>>12579872
>1997
>rover on Mars!
>2020
>rover on Mars!
Leading the way to lighting the flame that sparks the journey to begin the voyage towards one day committing to put astronauts in simulators training them towards taking the first steps to a future Mars landing maybe!

[Anonymous No.12579899]

>>12579859
>S- sir! I have, um, fixed the coffee pot in the break room. I'll have a report done by 11:00am when we all leave

[Anonymous No.12579903]

>>12579895
I guarrentee unique landing engines would have weighed less than shitty wings plus lifting body design

But then I guess there might be a hope it succeeds and that wouldn’t be allowed

[Anonymous No.12579907]

>>12579862
they're going to try to go for two in a year so they need to start early

[Anonymous No.12579909]

>>12579859
When are you taking that next ferocious step jeffrey?

[Anonymous No.12579913]

>>12579903
My nemesis

[Anonymous No.12579915]

>>12579790
>Lutyen b (Gj 273 b) is a much more likely world. It is 2.89X the mass of the Earth and has only 6% more stellar flux meaning that we know it’s likely not like Venus.
>2.89X the mass of the Earth
Wouldn't it need to have a massive radius to have reasonable gravity?

[Anonymous No.12579924]

>>12579915
Assuming an Earthlike density, Luyten b has a surface gravity of 1.6 g

> SO the Habitable Zone Super-Earth would have higher gravity than Earth with a similar composition. The radius would be ~1.33 Earth-radii, thus the surface gravity would be 1.63 gee. The inner planet is like Mercury in insolation terms, but Earth-like in mass.

> https://crowlspace.com/?p=2687

[Anonymous No.12579926]

The way it should have been

[Anonymous No.12579930]

>>12579926

[Anonymous No.12579931]

>>12579915
“Teegarden’s Star c” is a super Earth that is only 11% more massive than Earth. It also orbits a “quiet” red dwarf that doesn’t rape its atmosphere. It is rather chilly but with an Earth like atmosphere and tidal locking it is likely that liquid water can exist on the surface. It is only 12 light years away.

>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teegarden%27s_Star_c#/media/File%3ATeegarden's_star_proper_motion.gif

[Anonymous No.12579932]

>>12579926
nice picture but if that spacesuit design was supposed to look cool it failed spectacularly

[Anonymous No.12579933]

>>12579932
sfg draw challenge:
a cool roman space suit that doesnt look gay

[Anonymous No.12579934]

>>12579933

[Anonymous No.12579935]

>>12579933
>Roman
Like, as in the Roman Empire?

[Anonymous No.12579937]

>>12579935
Yeah, see the Roman astronauts a few posts up?

[Anonymous No.12579938]

>>12579934
Got a good chuckle out of me hahah

[Anonymous No.12579939]

>>12579935
yes

[Anonymous No.12579940]

>>12579937
Oh fuck me I didn't even notice the SPQR flag. Yeah I'll draw something, but it might take a while

[Anonymous No.12579947]

>>12579933
>here's your roman space suit bro

[Anonymous No.12579948]

>>12579924
So there's basically not a chance in hell it's really worthwhile to humans other than as a planetary zoo if it has life?
11.3 km/s orbital velocity with no atmosphere is brutal.
>>12579931
This one seems way more plausible. Not only for life in general but also for being of practical relevance to humans.

[Anonymous No.12579954]

>>12579948
Interstellar travel is impossible so who cares what planets are where?

[Anonymous No.12579957]

>>12579948
There are a few neat potentially habitable planets. I agree that Teergarden c is better but it’s also cold as shit. It’s equilibrium temperature is -47 degrees Celsius, while Earth's is -17 degrees Celsius - 30 degrees colder. All I’m trying to say is that TRAPPIST is a neat system but we have proof that it’s star is hyperactive and probably strips the atmosphere off those close-orbiting planets, let alone irridates their surfaces.

[Anonymous No.12579958]

>>12579891
F

[Anonymous No.12579959]

>>12579947

[Anonymous No.12579960]

BROS i found a video with a young, supple, babby jeff foust
https://youtu.be/hEwDD4GGPl8

[Anonymous No.12579961]

>>12579933
The kojima productions ludens suit is obviously inspired by Centurion armor.

[Anonymous No.12579962]

>>12579954
Based

[Anonymous No.12579967]

>i wasn't born at the right time to be one of the first practical xenobiologists

[Anonymous No.12579969]

>>12579957
We can deal with the cold, that's not even as bad as Antarctica.

[Anonymous No.12579983]

My friends who want to move to Mars, I say, 'Do me a favor, go live on the top of Mount Everest for a year first, and see if you like it - because it's a garden paradise compared to Mars

[Anonymous No.12579984]

>>12579926

[Anonymous No.12579986]

>>12579984
i wish that kojima productions' creative ability could have been applied to a better game than death stranding. because their spacesuit mascot guy is one of the coolest looking things ever

[Anonymous No.12579991]

>>12579983
What's his foot on, is he just hovering it there while the guy takes the picture?

[Anonymous No.12579994]

>>12579984
it's like a mix of medieval and roman

[Anonymous No.12579995]

>>12579969
I’m a large fan of the GJ1061 system. Planet “c” orbits in the inner edge of the habitable zone. It has a mass of 1.75X that of the Earth, and 1.2X its radius. It receives more starlight than the Earth, though, and is thus likely to be similar to Venus.

Planet “d” orbits farther out. It has 1.68X the mass of Earth and likely has 1.2X its radius. It receives a bit over half the starlight that Earth does, meaning that it is pretty cold. With an oxygen atmosphere, the average surface temperature is -23 degrees Celsius, or -10 degrees Fahrenheit.

GJ 1061 (the star) is a red dwarf, but it doesn’t have massive flares like Proxima, TRAPPIST, and Ross 128.

[Anonymous No.12579996]

>>12579991
hello fellow feet fetishist

[Anonymous No.12579997]

>>12579983
I would love to live on Everest lol. I grew up in Chicago shit was cold and is 10X more dangerous.

[Anonymous No.12580006]

>>12579997
Can tunnel boring machines bore upwards?
I wanna put a tunnel stairwell inside Everest so assholes can pay and see the top the easy way.

[Anonymous No.12580014]

>>12580006
The world is grey, the mountains old
The forge's fire is ashen-cold
No harp is wrung, no hammer falls
The darkness dwells in Durin's halls

[Anonymous No.12580015]

>>12579983
If the tip of Everest had the landmass of every continent, was full of unclaimed minerals, metals, other materials and had the world's richest man offering tickets to sovereign land for a few hundred thousand dollars then I suspect the tip of Everest would be a G8 nation.

[Anonymous No.12580021]

>>12579983
>>12580015
Why does Bezos feel the need to shit on spaceflight when he doesnt like the destination? As if "free space" is any more habitable than the surface of Mars. Are all O'Neillians this way? Jesus

[Anonymous No.12580022]

>>12580014
Don't tell me man doesn't belong down there, man belongs anywhere he pleases, and he'll do plenty well when he gets down there.

[Anonymous No.12580030]

>>12580022
mole people rise up

[Anonymous No.12580042]

>>12579759
>you will never play outerwilds for the first time again

[Anonymous No.12580062]

New Rhodesia on Mars. Will it happen bros?

[Anonymous No.12580078]

>>12579948
Why is that velocity brutal when not having an atmosphere?

[Anonymous No.12580087]

>>12580078
Usually atmospheres in the way and slow you down.

[Anonymous No.12580091]

>>12580078
For landing it is.
I don't know what it would be like in comparison to Earth on launch when accounting for atmospheric drag.

[Anonymous No.12580102]

Kamala at the head of the national space council. I wonder what she will bring to the table. I'm willing to give her a fair shake even though I disagree on politics :)

[Anonymous No.12580107]

>>12580102
Anyone with a brain knows Democrats hate space except for climate satellites

[Anonymous No.12580108]

>>12580062
Elon didn't grow up in the collapsing apartheid state and not learn anything from it.

[Anonymous No.12580110]

>>12580102
See what happens when you forget your nose?

[Anonymous No.12580117]

>>12578720

Unironically, the answer is KYS.
There is no reasoning with people who have no intentions whatsoever to reason.

[Anonymous No.12580120]

>>12580102
Planetary Protection reforms to decolonize space and prevent environmental disaster like the one unfolding here on Earth from being repeated by humans destroying the ecology of other planets and asteroids for the sake of capitalism and adventure. We'll leave the scientists to do science in space, ethically, responsibly, for the good of all humynkind.

[Anonymous No.12580122]

>>12580120
Why does ecology matter past it’s utility to us?

[Anonymous No.12580130]

>>12580122
Protecting ecology is the right thing to do.

[Anonymous No.12580135]

I take it none of you faggots recorded/uploaded Tom Mueller's presentation from yesterday?

[Anonymous No.12580136]

>>12580130
What ecology is there on the moon or Mars?

Rhetorical question, you are a commie piece of shit and should be strapped onto the nearest launch pad.

[Anonymous No.12580143]

>>12580130
>Protecting ecology is the right thing to do.

Why?

[Anonymous No.12580158]

>>12580087
Yes, but if there is nothing to slow you down, why does the orbital velocity matter. Do you need to orbit a planet in order to land on it?
>>12580091
When it comes to landing on a planet without an atmosphere, i think that rotational speed is more important to land on a desired site

[Anonymous No.12580160]

>>12580136
stop responding to bait like it's a serious post

[Anonymous No.12580162]

>>12579957
>we have proof?
do we? as far as i know its still speculation
i guess if the star really is raping the atmosphere it doesn't matter how close the planets are since the whole system is tiny.
damn i don't want to be a doomer. trappist 1 is my absolute favourite star system

[Anonymous No.12580169]

>>12580062
>next generation of cybertruck will literally be an electric Mars optimised Eland

[Anonymous No.12580170]

>>12579983
Dumb and wrong.

Antarctica is a better analogy. If it wasn't all claimed by nations already.

[Anonymous No.12580173]

>>12580022
Is that a hole in his roof so the last model rocket fits?

Can I say uh based?

[Anonymous No.12580176]

>>12580170
I feel like a private expedition to antarctica could work with negligible backlash. who's gonna stop us?

[Anonymous No.12580179]

>>12580162
I love TRAPPIST a lot too but past the PopSci “DUDE SEVEN PLANETS” stuff it turns out that the system sucks.

[Anonymous No.12580181]

>>12580176
The most based would be driving around the place in a big fuckoff truck thing like a Star Wars Juggernaut

[Anonymous No.12580183]

>>12580176

These guys, but I do wonder about that unclaimed part.

[Anonymous No.12580185]

>>12580022
>>12580173
you can go see it yourself

[Anonymous No.12580186]

How does one add aliens and cosmic horror into a hard Sci-fi setting? Is FTL really impossible?

[Anonymous No.12580187]

>>12580183
I’d love to explore the “unclaimed” part if I wasn’t an 18 year old Uni student with no money.

[Anonymous No.12580191]

>>12580183
oh yeah those countries will surely enforce those claims. lmao gimme a break, they wont even know we're there

[Anonymous No.12580195]

>>12580186
Hard sci-fi is just “dude what if science stopped progressing in current year”

[Anonymous No.12580199]

>>12580186
>>12580176
this is why we havent colonized antarctica

[Anonymous No.12580208]

>>12580176
>Negligible backlash

Dude, if you claimed a nice chunk of land, started building dome cities on it and bringing in colonists, your shit would be fucked by the US government so fast you would not believe it. You think the situation in Iran or North Korea is fucked? Now times that by a hundred.

[Anonymous No.12580210]

>>12580195
I always thought hard Sci-fi was just “dude let’s not put anything in the setting that is physically impossible” except with different levels of what counts as “possible.” Nuclear fusion is possible, and is more so than say faster than light travel, but less so than the ability for babies to be born on Mars.

[Anonymous No.12580212]

>>12580195
Hard sci fi generally assumes a logical progression of technology, ruling out Boop de doop spehss magick unlimited energy and atomic sized replicator robots.

[Anonymous No.12580218]

>>12580208
That's never happened and never will. What kind of fantasy world do you live in? The US couldnt give less of a shit about that wasteland.

[Anonymous No.12580224]

>>12580218
>be UN
>help there are evil people in antarctica who dont follow my resolution
>Does that mean i can bomb people?
>yes USA go ahead buddy

[Anonymous No.12580227]

>>12580195
THIS
So sick of people lacking the ability to realize that things we take for granted now, in physics, in telecommunications, in computing, in travel, in automation and so on, would seem like ""impossible"" magic to anyone just 100-200 years ago. And if you extrapolate that into the future, there would be common-place things everywhere, that we today think are impossible and practically magic.

[Anonymous No.12580229]

>>12580227
yes, but the science fiction of the 50s looks very similar to what is possible today

[Anonymous No.12580233]

>>12580227
I just want to know if FTL is possible. Wormholes, warp drives, jump drives...anything. I’m just curious because it seems like you can’t make a good Sci fi story with Alien Empires and value-brand Xeelee without FTL

[Anonymous No.12580239]

>>12580224
US doesnt need UN's permission for shit. and the US wont care, because it's an American colony

[Anonymous No.12580242]

>>12580233
Sci fi has been extremely lazy for the most part until now
remember all those star wars planets who consisted only of one biom? you could literally make the same story happen just on earth alone with no need for ftl. shows like the expanse use the solar system much more effectively but even there is much unused potential since they also reduce earth and mars to a single monolithic block for their story.
but accepting the fact a star system can have several planets alone would be a huge step forword for many classic sci fi storys which would greatly reduce the need for ftl

[Anonymous No.12580267]

>>12580021
Yes, they are a plague on the board and their incessant need to complain about how we should be making pointless space cans for some reason rather than creating sustainable Martian colonies never ceases to amaze me.

It’s as if they have no imagination at all.

[Anonymous No.12580270]

>>12580210
We have no idea what's possible and impossible lol

[Anonymous No.12580271]

>>12580022
Is that V2? Dangerously based.

[Anonymous No.12580274]

>>12580242
Single-biome planets is not implausible at all

[Anonymous No.12580276]

>>12580102
Well one thing we can be sure about is that NASA won’t be doing fucking anything for 4 to 8 years now, but then when do they do anything?

I guess Kamala will find a better use for the money by giving it to the local nog population.

Although the one silver lining about all this is that retard Manley will hopefully feel like an idiot.

[Anonymous No.12580279]

Gweilobros... I don't feel so good...

[Anonymous No.12580280]

>>12580276
>Manley feel like an idiot
He's a smug asshole, no way that's ever going to happen.

[Anonymous No.12580281]

>>12580108
His father actually killed 3 nogs that tried breaking into their home with Elon there so I would be very surprised if he didn’t learn a thing or two about what would happen to his colony if he lets them go there.

[Anonymous No.12580287]

>>12580218
>The US couldnt give less of a shit about that wasteland
>t. Ignoring three decades of US foreign policy where they invade, fuck up and occupy wastelands because of politics

Get a grip retard.

[Anonymous No.12580288]

>>12580233
The real answer is that no one really has any fucking clue. Everyone thinks that anything going faster than light would shatter the nuts of the universe and damn us all to cyber hell because of relativity for some fucking reason.
Regardless, a good story can be made out of anything. It's not that no FTL kneecaps a sci-fi story, it's that writers are rarely both creative and knowledgeable enough to make a good world in a sci-fi setting (or in general, really).

[Anonymous No.12580291]

>>12580287
>being this scared about the US cracking down on an Antarctican hippy colony
Ah, but it is you who is le retardaru, my friend

[Anonymous No.12580292]

>>12580210
How is Martian babies not possible? I’m sure you would have to give your habitats and bunkers tall ceilings, but I don’t see why it wouldn’t be possible.

[Anonymous No.12580294]

von Braun was very very based. i miss him bros

[Anonymous No.12580296]

>>12580291
Wow that sure looks like a comprehendable English post to me. Try not speaking in memes you stupid nigger.

[Anonymous No.12580298]

>>12580296
Oof, you ok buddy?

[Anonymous No.12580301]

>>12580291
>Me Antarctic hippy colony
>Me mine and refine oil and ship to any nation
>Me mine and refine Uranium and ship to any nation
>Me take disenfranchised and intelligent US citizens to live and work here

Yep, sure will be no retaliation here you stupid fucking nigger now go back to rebbit.

[Anonymous No.12580306]

>>12580301
You just dont want me to try because you know i'll succeed. foreigners such as yourself have no concept of undying free ambition. it's a shame you have no purpose or goals in life

[Anonymous No.12580307]

(you)

[Anonymous No.12580318]

Any good interviews of this man lying around?

[Anonymous No.12580325]

>>12580274
i mean those typical star wars planets who can support human life but consist only of jungle, desert, city etc
some fucking cold planets like hoth were you could only survive at the equator would definitely be possible though

[Anonymous No.12580379]

Hop when?

[Anonymous No.12580387]

>>12580379
18th it seems :(

[Anonymous No.12580401]

>>12580325
World deserts are pretty possible too, allowing for small seas, oasis, etc.

[Anonymous No.12580409]

>>12580107
Nice try, Old space shill.

[Anonymous No.12580441]

>>12580158
nope, but it helps a uck-ton
that's how the early moon landers (pre 1969), a few russian mars landers and most of the venera landers did it

[Anonymous No.12580452]

>>12580441
Why does it help?
Because it's easier to manouver when your craft naturally aligns with the planet and moves in relation to it?

[Anonymous No.12580459]

>>12580452
yea, and since literally all missions going to the moon need to have accurate as fuck landings, the aim, shoot and pray approach is basically gone

[Anonymous No.12580461]

>>12580452
There's no such thing as natural alignment, going into orbit first just means you are less dependent on your initial timing being perfect. You execute burn 1 to capture into orbit, then you can do some more burns to lower apoapsis and periapsis, then when you're ready you execute the landing burn.
Basically your window of successful insertion orbit parameters gets blown wide open if you are orbiting first and landing second. If you're directly landing from intercept you need to be intercepting within a small range of velocities and vectors.

[Anonymous No.12580466]

>>12580461
Do you think that when humanity will be a lot more experienced at spaceflight and every move will be executed perfectly, orbit capture will be ditched?
Landing on the site without excess manouvers seems a lot more optimized and efficient.
Just like the falcon 9 boosters don't hover and fire up their engines in the last moment in order to be fuel efficient.

[Anonymous No.12580475]

>>12579790
Semi related question: is the activity of a red dwarf related to how little mass it has? Would a larger red dwarf be more stable than a smaller one?

[Anonymous No.12580487]

>>12580466
Individual companies and organizations sure, but "humanity" as a whole? No lol. That's not a problem though.

[Anonymous No.12580495]

>>12580475
It's hard to tell but yeah, a lot of the really low mass red dwarves seem to have more active surfaces (ie flares n' sheeit) despite having smaller total power outputs. It also probably has a lot to do with metallicity of the star and other factors. Oh, and a small star has a habitable zone much closer to it, so the effects of flares become magnified.

[Anonymous No.12580496]

>>12580487
A mental shortcut

[Anonymous No.12580503]

>>12580475
more or less yes but it also depends on the age. generally (there are some exceptions though) older red dwarfs tend to be more calm. always remember that there are a huge variety of stars size wise which are all part of the red dwarf category.

[Anonymous No.12580506]

>>12580496
no u

[Anonymous No.12580508]

>>12580495
So more metallic stars have overally less fuel and lower freedom in fusion because the star is more in the state of equillibrium?

[Anonymous No.12580517]

>>12580508
not necessarily equilibrium, just that they burn through their shit more quickly thanks to the increased core density and general gravity driving the reaction.

[Anonymous No.12580526]

>>12580508
IIRC the total amount of fuel changes only slightly but the presence of metals allows the core to collapse further due to higher density and accelerate fusion, but remember that fusion rates don't necessarily correlate to surface activity. Instead, magnetic field activity is what correlates to stellar flares etc, which means that a faster rotating star (or whatever intensifies field activity in a burning ball of dense plasma) will have more flares regardless of fusion rates or metallicity.

[Anonymous No.12580537]

>>12580526
Do you know what intensifies magnetic activity? It seems pretty chaotic and random, yet cyclical

[Anonymous No.12580559]

>>12580475
Not a star doctor or anything but I'd assume that with the volume of the star being orders of magnitude smaller, perturbations deep inside the star are probably more often translated all the way to it's surface.

[Anonymous No.12580576]

So ok, bare with me here. Supposedly its close impossible that a technological civilization existed in the past, because the signs of that happening would be close to impossible to hide arguibly even after billions of years. (if we all suddenly died our modern cities would be at least recognizable 1000 million years later.

But what if there was a catastrophe that literally wiped the whole surface clean, like the asteroid impact which made the moon, literall renew the whole surface with magma there would be no trace of what was before except maybe a few extremely extreme extremophiles and evolution would start again.

but if you consider that scenario then it would become increasingly likely to find evidence of those civs on other world or in orbit, maybe not a lot but even big outpoust wont be visible until we go there.

actually scratch this idea is shit, like, there woudl be a lot of orbital stuff and we would have noticed, sorry you had to read this

[Anonymous No.12580578]

>>12580279

how can white bois even compete?

[Anonymous No.12580595]

>>12580387
Why

[Anonymous No.12580599]

>>12580576

it's just as well you prefaced your comment by saying it's shit because you're completely incorrect. Cities would start to collapse very quickly without maintenance, absolute max life of 100 years for skyscrapers etc.satellites too will have their orbits decay without intervention, although GEO satellites will be up there for a while longer.

the exception to that are the deep space probes, Voyager etc, which might drift for millions of years. but there's only 4 of those so far.

[Anonymous No.12580615]

>>12580599
He didn't imply the cities would stay clean and pristine, he said the *signs* would be hard to hide. Even when a skyscraper collapses, there's still lots of flat/straight bits of rock and metal, plus an unlikely mix of different materials mashed together, not to mention layers of roads and subways and sewers. Those would persist for at least millions of years until continental drift caused them to reach a subduction zone.

[Anonymous No.12580622]

>>12580599
Yes you retard a million years later the starbucks wont be stocked but the sign that there was something there remains well WELL after tat. There are natural rock formations that kept the same shape for millions of years, and just a patch of street surviving would have such a retarded overhwelmingly huge parts of straight liens in material much stronger than natural rocks, and also lots of chemical components that woul dbe totally unexplainable and wouldnt decay. and thats just one of the millions of streets thats in one of the millions of cities in the world. just one is enough

Hell, theres undeniable evidence of living beings from millions of millions of years ago, and those are soft weak little animals which produced NOTHING artificial.

tldr: the notion that cities would erase the evidence of their existence without something that literally melts every square cm of the earth is laughably stupid and instantly earns you a badge of "nto to be taken seriously and yes to be ebatedened up"

[Anonymous No.12580632]

>>12580599
>the exception to that are the deep space probes
how about bases on planets with no seismic activity? how about spent boosters?

[Anonymous No.12580640]

>>12580622
>>12580615
>>12580599
>>12580632


not gonna lie, i like starting shitstorms, but i had a point to all this.
The point is that theres a realistic scenario in which we could find traces of an advanced life that once lived on earth but in other worlds and that it would be feasible that it appeared only when we started really exploring.

Imagine a race that was like 50-100 years further than us, they have nice colonies all over the solar system, they are quite big but not big enough to be seen from telescopes, also not self sufficient yet. Then a hard to detect asteroids comes from the plane of the ecliptic slams into earth completely melts the crust.
Everyone not on earth dies because lack of supplies, they try to hold on but theres just not enough industrial base on those planets to survive, they all die. Strange aeons pass, all satellites decay, even the ones farther away, all discarded boosters also, since they had switched to reusable rockets to conquer the solar system. strange aeons pass primordial soups re-develops *le evolution* happens then were here.

could you imagine that? that would mean a realistic scenario in which some guy walking around in mars could find out a hatch to something like a 10.000 people alien city on mars and it would make sense

cna you imaginage that?

[Anonymous No.12580649]

>>12580537
No, and if I did I'd probably win some kind of award by publishing about it.

[Anonymous No.12580654]

Is anything going to happen at Boca Chica today? My office is closed due to someone getting the coof so I can finally sit at home and watch all day

[Anonymous No.12580659]

https://web.archive.org/web/20201118111025/https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001900760001-9.pdf?utm_source=share

[Anonymous No.12580661]

>>12580654
tomorrow if we are lucky

[Anonymous No.12580663]

>>12580654
fake a fever tomorrow

[Anonymous No.12580667]

New Shepard launch in approximately one bong

[Anonymous No.12580670]

>>12580576
BEAR with me here*

[Anonymous No.12580671]

>>12580659
How did CIA get away with this shit in the 20th century? Psychics, pseuds, schizophrenics, etc.

[Anonymous No.12580676]

>>12580671
how did NASA get away with SLS?

[Anonymous No.12580678]

>/int/ only allows respectful discussions of other cultures

[Anonymous No.12580681]

>>12580622
Earth could probably collide with Mars and there would still be structures like the Golden Gate Bridge or the foundation of Burj Khalifa that would survive in a discoverable form.

[Anonymous No.12580686]

>>12580661
>>12580663

I have shit to do. Can you all tell Elon to wait until after 1800 EST for the hop pretty please?

[Anonymous No.12580687]

>>12580671
this
>>12580676

by the time SLS is done it will have costed around the same as the apollo program, for no advantage of any kind, this is public knowledge an dpreventable in a time where people can know any screw up you have at any time via internet.

they are literally grabbing 100.000.000.000
and stealing it for nothing in exchange, all of this is aproved by congress and constantly talked about. Make it 120.000.000.000 if you want to add the jamnes webb memescope. all of this is done by civilian organizations in peace time with ample scrutiny from the public.

imagine the amount of money they could have spent back when telecoms werent developed enough and the united states secret organizations and military had free reign to do whatever the fuck they wanted even rape and torutre us citizens if it was for the good of the cause, can you imagine the
imagine what secret paramilitary organizations with black budgets could have gotten away with during war time

[Anonymous No.12580751]

>>12580667
got pushed back a half hour

[Anonymous No.12580776]

>>12580686
No, cleanup your room

[Anonymous No.12580778]

>>12580751
push back 1.5 hrs to 12 est

[Anonymous No.12580784]

>>12580576
>if we all suddenly died our modern cities would be at least recognizable 1000 million years later

No they wouldnt

[Anonymous No.12580810]

>>12580784
>the oldest fossil is around 3.48 billion years old
> one small clump of primitive bones and the imprint of flesh is still recognizable 3.48 bilion years after it died with no one to take care of it.
>three percent of the surface of the planet covered in buildings made of reinforced concrete and steel would not be noticeable 1 billion years later

i shiggirisioulsy hope youre not shigging

[Anonymous No.12580812]

uhhh... is there a particular reason as to why Virgin Galactic stock is up 20% today?

[Anonymous No.12580814]

>>12580812
yes, the board of directors are all literall direct relatives (brother/spouses) of democrat senators. Basically no matter how bad they screw they will still get subsidized, they are basically old space now

[Anonymous No.12580818]

>>12580812
ARK investment rumours bumping the price up.

[Anonymous No.12580819]

>>12580812
new space ETF - $ARKX

[Anonymous No.12580823]

>>12580812

[Anonymous No.12580833]

>>12579759
based

[Anonymous No.12580835]

>>12580622
The one exception to that is sea level rise. Salt water eats most construction materials except stone. It's why the story of Atlantis persists.

[Anonymous No.12580840]

>>12580833
>not at all even remotely to scale
Lame.

[Anonymous No.12580859]

>>12580835
>>12580835
>Salt water eats most construction materials except stone
wow, if only 99.9 of our materials werent stony in nature, particularly concrete.

youd probably find some all concrete pristine with the holes where the steel rebar bars went in

[Anonymous No.12580864]

>>12580814
this is the first time i hear this, any source?

[Anonymous No.12580875]

>anons arguing about the traces of civilization left in millions of years if it collapsed now
What does that even have to do with space? That's on the ground archeology. Right now we're still working on the "seeing planets that aren't gas giants, very close to their parent stars or both" part due to the biases and limitations of detection.

[Anonymous No.12580932]

>>12580859
Salt water eats concrete like a motherfucker.

[Anonymous No.12580939]

What would happen to the James Webb program if the rocket carrying the telescope were to explode before delivering the payload to orbit?

[Anonymous No.12580943]

>>12580939
Renamed to James Uebb Space Telescope

[Anonymous No.12580946]

>>12580939
in the unlikely situation that it does, I would die

[Anonymous No.12580950]

>>12580939
I imagine they have a suicide pact for this very scenario

[Anonymous No.12580952]

>>12580932
well theres still a ton of shit made of literal stone tiles, docks made of special antis altwater concrete

[Anonymous No.12580954]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9oTZu2HP8U
Cringecast is LIVE

[Anonymous No.12580956]

>>12580939
it would be extremely painful

[Anonymous No.12580961]

Dubs and the rocket carrying James Webb explodes on ignition, leaving no discernable trace of the telescope intact

[Anonymous No.12580962]

>>12580954
>Covid meme
I want the flying water tower back

[Anonymous No.12580963]

>>12580576
>if we all suddenly died our modern cities would be at least recognizable 1000 million years later.
Define "at least recognizable". I'm pretty sure almost all surface evidence of an advanced civilization would be wiped out by natural processes.

[Anonymous No.12580967]

Mods struggling to delete all the Jeff Whos on estronauts stream kek

[Anonymous No.12580969]

>>12580967
kek, BO doesn't seem to have mods

[Anonymous No.12580973]

>>12580967
>it's fucking real
>"The Elonsexuals are out in full force today "
Fucking hell.

[Anonymous No.12580977]

>>12580963
>Define "at least recognizable"
There would be undeniable evidence of something not natural that happened. Even if every last molecule of the original decays, the results of that decay would be arranged in patterns that even the most clueless of species would recognize as not natural.

thats excluding all the natural preservation phenomena that cna happen

[Anonymous No.12580979]

>everyone is just spamming Jeff Who?
i love it

[Anonymous No.12580982]

I need to convince my grandmother to jump off virgin galactic now before everyone realizes how much of a sham it is...

[Anonymous No.12580983]

>g-guys please fly on our suborbital rocket so you can practice to fly on orbital rockets one day

[Anonymous No.12580986]

>>12580961
Would much rather have it launch perfectly and reach its destination only for them to then discover some critical flaw with the hardware that makes it totally unusable

[Anonymous No.12580987]

>>12580576
No they wouldn't, 100-200 years is all it would take for 99% of visible traces of humanity to disappear. Within 500k-1m years for all archeological evidence to decay. The two signs of our civilization that would still be visible to an observer after that happens would be a thin layer/increase in CO2 in the crust, and non-decaying plastic particles all over the place. CO2 layers can be caused by nature (supervolcano eruption or large asteroid impact), but plastics don't occur in nature so that would be the dead give away that intelligent beings once existed on the planet.

Aside from that though, the Earth is going to start getting too hot to support life in 500k-1m years anyways, complex life has probably just under a million years left on Earth before conditions become to extreme for it to survive. Microbial/simple life may continue on for some time after that, but it won't be able to re-evolve into something more complex unless it gets yeeted from the solar system to an exoplanet with suitable environment to support life and the chances of that are astronomically (pun intended) small. We are it. There will be no other intelligent species produced by Earth because there simply isn't enough time for another intelligent species to develop. If humanity was wiped out tomorrow, then the history of intelligent life on Earth is effectively over. The problem is that any event powerful enough to wipe humanity is going to kill any species that's near our intelligence level already, and it will take to long for another intelligent species to evolve with the time remaining on the Earth.

So yeah, we are it. If we die off, then it's game over. The only observers to look at our world for signs of intelligent life would be aliens, not Earth-based intelligent life.

[Anonymous No.12580988]

>>12580962
Come back tomorrow

[Anonymous No.12580990]

>>12580954
Can someone redpill me on this mission? Is this hop higher or lower than 12.5km?

[Anonymous No.12580992]

my fucking sides

[Anonymous No.12580994]

>We have a full scale model of the Ladder of Doom that astronauts practice getting injured on every day

[Anonymous No.12580998]

You fuckers in the comments top kek

[Anonymous No.12580999]

wait CLPS is just on a normal old falcon 9? Fuck, why do we have to wait until 2022?

[Anonymous No.12581001]

So much for "Team Space"

[Anonymous No.12581004]

>>12580987
>No they wouldn't, 100-200 years is all it would take for 99% of visible traces of humanity to disappear.
we have visible traces of primitive civilizations from 42.000 years ago.

and fossils from 3.8 billion years ago.

Do you actually somehow think that 3% of the surface of the planet covered in modern cities is somehow less durable than the above or are you just pretending to be retarded?

[Anonymous No.12581007]

MADE IN ALABAMA BOIS

[Anonymous No.12581008]

>NEW CAPSULE
Looks like the same old tumor growth capsule to me.

[Anonymous No.12581009]

>the important part of Artemis is a woman on the moon
kek

[Anonymous No.12581010]

>>12581007
I don't see why they're making a big deal out of that, not like Shelby is around anymore, no need to please his geriatric ass anymore. Must be an old ad.

>>12581009
Yes, because that's the only way they'll be able to sell it to the fucking normalfags.

[Anonymous No.12581012]

>>12581009
easiest way to bait in leftists

[Anonymous No.12581013]

>People are paying money to harass Jeff

[Anonymous No.12581015]

>>12581001
>"Team Space"
Team Space goes into orbit and beyond, not glorified sounding rockets with observation pods and a snack bar.

[Anonymous No.12581016]

>hold
Jeff wHold?

[Anonymous No.12581017]

Are these fuckers seriously on hold?

[Anonymous No.12581019]

>>12581001
BO can join team space when they actually make it there

[Anonymous No.12581020]

>>12581017
SPACE (suborbital) IS HARD

[Anonymous No.12581021]

There are people in the comments named Jeff Who, so their comments can't be removed

[Anonymous No.12581022]

>>12581017
It's fucking hydromeme, which makes it needlessly complex.

[Anonymous No.12581023]

>Inspiring the next generation... maybe... to go into space!

Peak Oldspace.

[Anonymous No.12581024]

>>12581009
Hey that might be the only reason Artemis survives the democrats.
>First Artemis crew on the Moon
>first women- the space lesbian
>first black man- Victor Glover
>first asian man - Jonny Kim
Victor Glover will go to the Moon and I can't wait to see his reaction

[Anonymous No.12581026]

>>12581004
>we have visible traces of primitive civilizations from 42.000 years ago
Cave drawings and some simple tools (the authenticity of which is under scrutiny anyways). Certain elements our existence would survive (hence, ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE) for up to 500k-1m years.

Cities would quickly become unaffiliated particles of silicate/carbon (dust basically, from all the concrete) and iron. Actually one thing from cities that would be around for a very long time would be alloys like steel, but even those would decay with time. Like I said, after about 500k years or so the best indicator is actually plastic particles.

But my point is, traces of humanity would survive for very long time periods (deep space probes and GEO satellites as someone else pointed out), plastics, underground/preserved sites, etc. Human fossils would be fucking everywhere.

Any intelligent species that knew what to look for would definitely be able to work out what humans were and that we were an intelligent, civilization building species. But they would have very little idea what humanity actually looked like, they certainly wouldn't know what our buildings or art looked like. Just that we existed and that we had large urban centers and that something killed us all. Unless they somehow found the Voyager probes in which case they might have a slightly better idea of who we were.

[Anonymous No.12581027]

>>12580576
This is incorrect, if a technologically advanced civilization was here on earth even a few million years ago, all evidence would be wiped clean by time. Even metals and computers and buildings and “permanent” structures. Weathering and erosion really fucks everything, especially over long periods of geologic time

[Anonymous No.12581029]

>the hold is just continuously counting up

[Anonymous No.12581031]

>Jeff holds the penis rocket

[Anonymous No.12581032]

>>12581024
Cannot fucking wait for the first space chimpout, it will be legendary

[Anonymous No.12581033]

>blue origin stream
>JEFF WHO
>orbit when
>big pp

expect blue origin snipers soon

[Anonymous No.12581034]

>>12581026
>Actually one thing from cities that would be around for a very long time would be alloys like steel
Most steel is regular carbon steel and most cities are on the coast, so it will be dust within single digit years of exposure to the elements

[Anonymous No.12581036]

>>12581010
>not like Shelby is around anymore
He’s still the senior Senator from Alabama, just no longer the chair of the appropriations committee. He’s one of the longest serving Senators, relatively moderate, and unlikely to retire until the 2022 senatorial election. The guy’s an institution.

[Anonymous No.12581037]

>14th mission to "space"

[Anonymous No.12581039]

Kek, Jeffrey Whomst is behind the camera holding a gun to those presenter’s heads

[Anonymous No.12581043]

>>12580158
>Yes, but if there is nothing to slow you down, why does the orbital velocity matter. Do you need to orbit a planet in order to land on it?
I was answering why no atmosphere on a large planet would make it harder to land on it. I have no clue what you're on about with orbital velocity here.

[Anonymous No.12581047]

lol what a shitshow

[Anonymous No.12581049]

Jesus Christ... is there a more pathetic and lazy name for a space company than “Blue Origin”? Absolutely soulless

[Anonymous No.12581052]

>>12581039
Does Jeff even know what Blue Origin is anymore besides getting $1 billion bills for it annually

[Anonymous No.12581058]

>stan stan stan everywhere in chat
I thought it was just out local retard forcing a meme, is this a thing outside of these threads?

[Anonymous No.12581061]

When is NS-14 supposed to take off? The T- countdown isn't moving.

[Anonymous No.12581062]

>>12581058
Yeah it’s actually kind of funny. Bezos has had this company for 20 years and he has yet to put a single gram into orbit. I’m glad the chat is trolling

[Anonymous No.12581063]

>T - 12:00
>13 minutes of hold and counting
J U S T

[Anonymous No.12581065]

>>12581062
Almost 2 minutes ago. It's in a hold that just keeps getting longer and longer.

[Anonymous No.12581067]

>>12581058
"stan" has been around forever. Its specific usage in aerospace is r*dditors with a cultural aversion to admitting one thing can be better than another thing.

[Anonymous No.12581070]

>mid-level winds
Lmao

[Anonymous No.12581072]

>>12581061
Welcome to rocket launches. This is a hold. Launches are almost always a mystery. May be delayed for a few minutes. A few hours or scrubbed for a few days. Gotta get comfy.

[Anonymous No.12581073]

>>12581070
We got too cocky LNGbros

[Anonymous No.12581075]

>>12581070
It's an 18m tall glorified sounding rocket. You could probably topple it with a vuvuzuela.

[Anonymous No.12581076]

Why hate New Shepard tho?
Like isn't launch of any rocket good thing?

[Anonymous No.12581078]

>>12581067
>"stan" has been around forever
Where? Not here until recently with one anon posting it repeatedly. This some twitch shit or a discord thing?

[Anonymous No.12581082]

>space camp
is her kid ice wallo come?

[Anonymous No.12581084]

>>12581076
It's a toy, it's not a real rocket.

[Anonymous No.12581087]

What went wrong?

[Anonymous No.12581088]

>>12581078
It’s from twitter I believe
>>12581076
No, this rocket sucks

[Anonymous No.12581089]

>>12581043
I was asking about why the orbital velocity is brutal. Reffering to this part:
>11.3 km/s orbital velocity with no atmosphere is brutal.

[Anonymous No.12581090]

Who do they have these cringe scripted interjections all the time? Fuck it's tiresome

[Anonymous No.12581091]

>>12581076
The experiments it holds can be launched on 1940s rocket tech

[Anonymous No.12581092]

>>12581078
General internet culture. Means obsessed fan, originated from the Eminem song. And yeah I realize, that's why I separated the general usage and the specific usage in this sphere.

[Anonymous No.12581096]

>MILLIONS OF PEOPLE LIVING AND WORKING IN SPACE
>can't reach orbit

[Anonymous No.12581097]

>>12581076
It's a mushroom headed little pindick when we've gotten used to Humanities humongous steel thundercock.


Also >Suborbital

[Anonymous No.12581100]

Jeff Bezos realizing his wife is gone, Elon is now richer than him, and his youtube chat is just dunking on him. That’s what he gets for being a social justice fraud lmao

[Anonymous No.12581101]

>>12581076
Imagine if SpaceX, instead of developing Falcon 9, just kept launching one grasshopper a year for the last 10 years and expected people to get excited about it. That's New Shephard.

[Anonymous No.12581102]

>>12581076
Imagine if NASA launched Freedom 7 and just kept doing that, not going any further, all the while talking about how they're gonna land on the Moon. Meanwhile the Russians keep laughing. In this situation however, SpaceX are advancing rather than doing just propaganda victories.

[Anonymous No.12581103]

Hope it blows up, fuck your "space" tourism, Jeff.

[Anonymous No.12581104]

>>12580014
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pISzxdEgDCU

[Anonymous No.12581106]

SpaceX ninjas are currently battling BO paramilitary forces in west Texas

[Anonymous No.12581107]

>every continent
>none from africa
>none from oceania
uhh

[Anonymous No.12581108]

>>12581088
>>12581084
>>12581091
>>12581097
>>12581101
>>12581102

I mean even if it's relatively shit, but launch of rocket anyway in principle is pretty cool...

[Anonymous No.12581110]

>>12581108
No. This is a fucking carnival attraction for the terminally rich and bored.

[Anonymous No.12581111]

>tfw some dudes in copenhagen are going to do manned suborbital flight in their free time, through crowdfunding
Jeff pls

[Anonymous No.12581112]

>>12581108
Yeah if it was orbital at least.

[Anonymous No.12581114]

>>12581106
ULA Netrunners poking holes in the BO grid causing launch holds, SpaceX corposec watching nervously from afar

[Anonymous No.12581115]

>>12581108
If literally every launch blows your skirt up even if it's sborbibal and meaningless that's fine by me, still reserve the right to laugh at Jeff Who tho

[Anonymous No.12581117]

>>12581108
It’s a simple hydrogen engine that basically just takes a tube and a payload to the 100 km mark (literally the bare minimum of ‘hahaha it’s TECHNICALLY space XD’) and comes back down.

[Anonymous No.12581118]

propulsinve landing?

[Anonymous No.12581129]

>>12581118
The booster always did propulsive landing. I think.

[Anonymous No.12581130]

>Estronaut visibly upset when he reads chat
Jeff who?

[Anonymous No.12581132]

[Anonymous No.12581134]

>>12581088
Ah that explains it, I don't use that faggotty shit
>>12581092
When did M&M become relevant again? Isn't he like 50? That song came out like 20 years ago, weird that it'd pop up again now in meme (((culture)))

[Anonymous No.12581135]

>>12581110
Do you mean stream is intended for rich and bored?

[Anonymous No.12581136]

>LOX-LNG engine

[Anonymous No.12581138]

>>12581134
It's been around a long time, anon.

[Anonymous No.12581139]

>>12581135
You really don't know what NS-4 is intended for, do you?

[Anonymous No.12581143]

>>12581118

[Anonymous No.12581144]

>>12581134
It was the Kpop fags that popularized it on Twitter

[Anonymous No.12581145]

>>12581132
>Chiken Takeover

[Anonymous No.12581146]

>>12581130
For real? Maybe he really believes that TEAM SPACE shit after all lmao

[Anonymous No.12581148]

>>12581139
yes

[Anonymous No.12581150]

>>12581118
The spaceflight equivalent of one of those 25 cent car rides for kids in the mall

[Anonymous No.12581152]

>>12581143
10/10

[Anonymous No.12581151]

>>12581143
Dangerously based

[Anonymous No.12581154]

>>12581143
Based

[Anonymous No.12581155]

>>12580022
Von Braun was such a cool guy.

>>12580199
ATMoM is actually a really solid example. If you postulate that their aether-wings had an effect similar to a plasma magnet sail it's STILL hard scifi today aside from the fictitious Antarctic geography, and it was written in the 1930s.

[Anonymous No.12581156]

Could an expendable second stage be put on the top of New Shepard to turn it into a partially-reusable orbital smallsat launcher?

[Anonymous No.12581157]

looooooooooool, we're back in hold.

[Anonymous No.12581160]

What the hell do they do during the ten second holds?

[Anonymous No.12581161]

>>12581160
edging

[Anonymous No.12581162]

>>12581144
I know nothing of that world so I'll take your word for it.
>>12581138
It started getting forced here just a few months ago by one anon, don't pretend otherwise just because it was you.

[Anonymous No.12581163]

>>12581160
No, their holds are for as long as they fucking feel like it.

[Anonymous No.12581165]

>>12581146
He's constantly coping
>you can like other things than starship
>they're doing important experiments

[Anonymous No.12581166]

>after this estronaut releases a video with a title like "a serious message to the community" and all the r*dditors come out to villify/apologize
I will fucking lose it

[Anonymous No.12581171]

>in b4 another hold

>>12581165
>important experiments
Like send up postcards?

[Anonymous No.12581172]

>>12581162
I was answering a fucking question nimrod, no I don't use it here I've just been around the block longer than you.

[Anonymous No.12581173]

>>12581092
Which song?

[Anonymous No.12581174]

>>12581173
literally stan

[Anonymous No.12581176]

>>12581173
lel
Stan

[Anonymous No.12581177]

Q ON BOARD

[Anonymous No.12581178]

>>12579751
How demoralising must it be for Blue Origin that by the time they can mount a challenge to Starship via New Armstrong, Spacex will probably be flying an 18m variant of starship that can get 500 tons minimum to space(if the height stayed the same) and atleast 700-1000 tons if height increased by the efforts of the magicians in the Raptor and alloy dev department. Theyll probably be a comfy SLS replacement as the second national launch architecture for the US gov and be rolling in tax payers money. But I think Blue chance of being a SpaceX equal is gone.

[Anonymous No.12581179]

>>12581172
Yes yes anon, we've all been here longer than everyone else. Don't take it personally that I think the 'stan' meme is gay.

[Anonymous No.12581180]

>imperial metrics

[Anonymous No.12581182]

>>12581174
>>12581176
Kek. Thanks

[Anonymous No.12581183]

>altitude
>ft
>feet
>fucking FEET

[Anonymous No.12581184]

The drone shot was pretty cool, maybe we can see SpaceX doing something like that in Boca

[Anonymous No.12581185]

The audio on engine startup was pretty cool

[Anonymous No.12581187]

Boca Chica BTFO'd by Corn Ranch

[Anonymous No.12581188]

>announcer mic keeps cutting out
I understand, the technology required to send a voice around the world is still new and complicated

[Anonymous No.12581189]

No separation camera? Seriously?

[Anonymous No.12581190]

>>12581183
Makes the numbers look big.

[Anonymous No.12581191]

10/10 cameras

[Anonymous No.12581192]

>TFW no masculine QT she-male tomboy presenter for Starship

[Anonymous No.12581194]

>leave spaceX to me

[Anonymous No.12581195]

>>12581179
>guy asks something
>answer
>take offence that someone knows more than you about anything and start accusing them of shit
Why are you like this? I don't give a shit about it.

[Anonymous No.12581201]

>>12581192
Musked.
>>12581194
Shelbyd.

[Anonymous No.12581202]

>>12580136
>>12580160
The argument is that nobody can prove ecology won't suddenly appear in the future and that humans have no right to interfere with the martian/ceresian/2001YY and so on indigenous life that might come to exist.

Just so you that reasoning is real and not a shitpost.

[Anonymous No.12581205]

>>12581178
>demoralizing
I suspect that if they are at all demoralized from being paid to do no work, it will be because they are yet to launch anything in orbit despite nearing retirement after 20 years of hard work.

[Anonymous No.12581206]

LMAO it barely made the landing pad

[Anonymous No.12581207]

>camera knocked over
lol
>spends forever hovering and nowhere near the bullseye
lol

[Anonymous No.12581208]

Elon Who?

[Anonymous No.12581209]

For a moment I thought it was going to fall sideways holy shit

[Anonymous No.12581210]

Did a little hovering there but it made it

[Anonymous No.12581212]

That touchdown looked super sketchy

[Anonymous No.12581215]

>No bullseye on landing pad
yikes

[Anonymous No.12581216]

HOLY FUCK THEY JUST LANDED A BOOSTER
SPACEX IS FINISHED

[Anonymous No.12581218]

>>12581195
>taking it personally

[Anonymous No.12581222]

Did it fail? I'm too busy spamming jeff who in chat to have noticed

[Anonymous No.12581223]

god, imagine spending six figures for like 2 minutes in suborbital space

[Anonymous No.12581224]

BO's landing profile must use like 4x the fuel to SpaceX's suicide burn just for the sake of being able to claim they're not doing the exact same thing lmao

[Anonymous No.12581225]

why it's tilted

[Anonymous No.12581226]

>>12581216
If only SpaceX was in the carnival business, they might feel threatened.

[Anonymous No.12581229]

How big is the Blue Origin rocket compared to Starship?

[Anonymous No.12581230]

Did the thrusters even fire? Speed went 20 MPH to 0 instantly

[Anonymous No.12581232]

>>12581230
Didn't look like it. Oof.

[Anonymous No.12581234]

>only 3 minutes of 0g then back down you go
lmao what is the point of this thing

[Anonymous No.12581239]

>>12581229
New Shepard (full stack) is 18 meters tall. Starship is 50m.

>>12581230
It always looks like that

[Anonymous No.12581240]

>>12581230
>>12581232
Alibaba tier avionics for the stream.

>>12581234
To provide entertainment for the terminally rich and bored.

[Anonymous No.12581241]

>>12581232
The lady is droning on about a "soft landing" and thrusters while the capsule slams down on screen. Hilarious shit.

[Anonymous No.12581243]

>>12581230
>estronaut will be the first passenger because you need to be spineless to survive

[Anonymous No.12581244]

>>12581234
You get more weightlessness from the vomit-comet don't you? They usually do like 20+ loops on one of those flights, this thing is literally useless.
Neat drone shots of it launching though I'll admit.

[Anonymous No.12581248]

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1349766940059987971
>The rumor I've heard is NS-16 is a possible human flight
hmm

[Anonymous No.12581249]

>>12581241
The "slam" is retrothrusters just like Soyuz touches down. That much they have sorted. It's in the fucking desert after all so dust blasting up from a thruster fire is normal.

[Anonymous No.12581253]

>>12581229
The New Glenn is much bigger, not to mention much more advanced and safer. It was designed and assembled by the best of the best, for we at Blue Origin care about having people put their trust in us, knowing they can count on us to fully deliver, be it on schedule or premises.
Failure is no option. Succes is imminent. Hail Bezos. Go Blue Origin.

[Anonymous No.12581254]

How is her audio cutting out

[Anonymous No.12581257]

>>12581248
Who is the lucky person who gets to ride the dildo of truth?

[Anonymous No.12581258]

> On 23 November 2015, after reaching 100.5 km (62.4 mi) altitude (outer space), the suborbital New Shepard booster successfully performed a powered vertical soft landing, the first time a suborbital booster rocket had returned from space to make a successful vertical landing

>Unlike most rockets, which are expendable launch systems, since the introduction of the Full Thrust version, Falcon 9 is partially reusable, with the first stage capable of re-entering the atmosphere and landing vertically after separating from the second stage. This feat was achieved for the first time on flight 20 in December 2015.


wait so shepard did soft vertical landing earlier than falcon 9?

it's such shame that they didn't develop since that time

[Anonymous No.12581262]

>going suborbital is "inspiring"

[Anonymous No.12581264]

>>12581244
Yes lmao, the vomit comet is cheaper and you get more time to fly around

[Anonymous No.12581266]

>>12581254
Doing coverage of space is hard

[Anonymous No.12581268]

>>12581258
Yeah, Bezos even congratulated SpaceX for being 2nd.

[Anonymous No.12581269]

>

[Anonymous No.12581270]

>>12581258
Who cares about suborbital. That's like winning a medal in the paralympics when running alongside downies.

[Anonymous No.12581271]

>>12581262
ok suborbital starship was good

[Anonymous No.12581274]

>>12581264
Wernher is such a sperg on camera lmao

[Anonymous No.12581275]

damn that stream cut fast

[Anonymous No.12581276]

>>12581269
Nominal.

[Anonymous No.12581279]

>>12581269
New Shep doing its Starship impression

[Anonymous No.12581281]

>may have won the HLS
Did I hear estronaut correctly?

[Anonymous No.12581282]

>>12581264
I didn't know he got to experience weightlessness, that's awesome. Good for him.

[Anonymous No.12581288]

>>12581269
yeah what the fuck was that

[Anonymous No.12581290]

>>12581288
it was so far off course that it took out a camera on the way down

Could someone get a webm of the wobbling after landing burn light?

[Anonymous No.12581291]

>>12581281
Sounds like he's just speculating

[Anonymous No.12581292]

>>12581269
>looks drunk
>lands off-center on dry land with no wind
>spend seconds hovering in the air because they can't calculate a hoverslam
Considering that NS is a tumescent landing test bed, you'd think they'd at least advance their landing profile with it.

[Anonymous No.12581294]

>>12581178
Hey nerds, I got a question. I understamd that for a possible 18m Starship to not look like a fat chode and have some decent height increase, the Raptors will need to get significantly more powerful or spacex will need to create a special light steel alloy. Do people in the know think that Raptor 3.0 or 4.0 can have enough power to give an 18m variant atleast a 30 percent boost to the height so it wont look comically fat and maybe push the capacity to the 1000 ton mark? Is that in the realm of possibilities?

[Anonymous No.12581299]

>>12581292
You'd think after twenty fucking years they would figure out how to get it near the center of the landing pad

[Anonymous No.12581301]

>>12581294
Chodes are the future anon, embrace V O L U M E

[Anonymous No.12581304]

>>12581294
Raptor 2 will be a nuclear salt water rocket
t. knower

[Anonymous No.12581305]

>>12581294
>not wanting the CHONK starship
never gonna make it bro

[Anonymous No.12581306]

>>12581294
It looks comically fat because all our rockets are tiny stick missiles. Once things go big they gotta go wide that's how it works.

[Anonymous No.12581308]

>this was that booster's first flight
Didn't it have soot on it at launch?

[Anonymous No.12581310]

>>12581294
18m Starship will basically be ITS but W I D E

[Anonymous No.12581313]

>>12581290

[Anonymous No.12581316]

>>12581294
The New Glenn will be as wide as 25m, and it's height will be of about 50m
t. New Glenn engineer

[Anonymous No.12581317]

>>12581249
Are you absolutely positive those thrusters did anything?

[Anonymous No.12581319]

>>12581317
Every fucking NS landing looks the same and those numbers on screen are not accurate, listen to what she said on stream a bit closer.

[Anonymous No.12581320]

>>12581317
They absolutely fired

[Anonymous No.12581322]

>>12581317
Its dusty down there

[Anonymous No.12581323]

>>12581310
The nice thing about chonkship is that you can finally do ITS style landing legs without ruining your mass budget thanks to square-cube magic.

[Anonymous No.12581328]

>>12581323
Fuck yeah baby

[Anonymous No.12581335]

>>12581317
What's the material difference between a crash and a thruster fire if both are practically instantaneous? I wanna see some actual g figures on this thing.

[Anonymous No.12581340]

>>12581317
https://youtu.be/-l7MM9yoxII?t=1089

Soyuz looks similar but you can see the light from the ignition.

[Anonymous No.12581341]

>>12581335
>What's the material difference between a crash and a thruster fire if both are practically instantaneous?
Propellant budget?

[Anonymous No.12581342]

How they're gonna transport starship, knowing that it's size is too big and wide for roads? Via sea?

[Anonymous No.12581344]

>>12581294
>Make penis shaped rockets
>Feminists complain
>Make shorter fat rockets
>Feminists complain less
>Make round, short, vagina shaped rockets
>Feminists love it enough to fund it via Kickstarter

[Anonymous No.12581345]

>>12581342
It has engines.

[Anonymous No.12581347]

>>12581290

[Anonymous No.12581349]

>>12581342
Starship assumes direct control and flies wherever it needs to go on its own.

[Anonymous No.12581351]

>>12581342
They'll build them right next to the launch site, and also have ship launch sites.

[Anonymous No.12581352]

>>12581335

It is dropping by ~20 mph so an equivalent 20 mph car crash

[Anonymous No.12581354]

>>12581342
The barge is the most important vehicle in spaceflight

[Anonymous No.12581357]

>>12581347
thanks, anon. It really went off to the left there just before landing

[Anonymous No.12581358]

>>12581349
>>12581345
I understand that it can flies itself, but then cost of fuel could be pretty high

[Anonymous No.12581359]

>>12581087
They got too cocky bro

[Anonymous No.12581361]

>>12581347
I can't tell if this is more precise or less precise then SpaceX

[Anonymous No.12581363]

>>12581317
For comparison. SpaceX splashdown looks much softer.

[Anonymous No.12581364]

>>12581361
The most recent Falcon landing was a perfect bullseye... on a ship in the ocean.

[Anonymous No.12581366]

>>12581024
It would be hilarious if they put a chinese person on one of the artemis missions so nasa could say they put the first chinese person on the moon before china did.

[Anonymous No.12581368]

>>12581361
spacex bullseyes every time without hovering

[Anonymous No.12581371]

>>12581342
I'm pretty sure they'll only ever launch into orbit from Boca Chica and KSC so yeah by boat

[Anonymous No.12581374]

>>12581342
they could hop to and from land to their sea launch site

[Anonymous No.12581376]

>>12581371
You think they won't build second etc port?

[Anonymous No.12581381]

>>12581165
Blue Origin must absolutely be bullied if they will have any chance of getting to orbit

[Anonymous No.12581393]

>thread dead

[Anonymous No.12581394]

>>12580102
she will ensure a white man never walks on the moon again.

[Anonymous No.12581399]

>>12580409
based northrop

[Anonymous No.12581400]

>>12581394
Hey that's my bike!

[Anonymous No.12581408]

here's a video of elon getting his mclaren f1 in 1999.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9mczdODqzo

[Anonymous No.12581411]

>>12581205
some people actually want to do something with space. not everyone is boeing

[Anonymous No.12581422]

>>12581130
respect is something that must be earned. You can't just DEMAND that people like a multi-billion-dollar corporation. And then there's that too. This is a corp funded by the richest jackass in the world it's not a fucking person who cares if people dump on it.

[Anonymous No.12581425]

https://youtu.be/R8PEnK3aoFQ?t=263
>I mean I'm not really super hardcore about being ultra environmental in all things, because I think that you don't want to make life miserable.

[Anonymous No.12581426]

Someone said BO is planning for two flights this year, any info on the second one?

[Anonymous No.12581428]

>>12581408
This video and era is why Elon was largely hated before Falcon Heavy by a large group of people. You can see more clearly after watching this why those Russians wouldn't sell him rockets.

Justine saying 'decadent' or indeed anything is grating and unbearable but Elon is fucking hilarious in this vid. She essentially divorced him because she wanted to be known in her own right as a novelist and not as someones wife so unbearable is it.

[Anonymous No.12581429]

>>12581178
BO is going to be reduced to an engine manufacturer by that point. Though Jeff might keep New Glenn around as his personal starlink competitor ferry. SpaceX having their own rockets to put sats in place is a huge advantage.

[Anonymous No.12581430]

>>12580102
people don't understand that Kamala is a corporate shill first and a democrat second. She presided over the facebook whatsapp merger and said nothing only to shockingly receive a sizeable corporate donation sometime later. She's going to sell out to the highest bidder which means lining oldspace pockets and cost plus defense programs and extending deadlines so people can get paid for longer.

[Anonymous No.12581431]

https://physicsworld.com/a/dark-coated-starlink-satellites-are-better-but-not-perfect-say-astronomers/
>Horiuchi suggests that it would also be a good idea to raise the operating altitude of the Starlink satellites. Satellites in a rival constellation operated by OneWeb are darker, he notes, because their orbital altitude is higher, at 1200 km.

[Anonymous No.12581437]

>>12581428
Justine may be perpetually butthurt, but she did bear him 5 children which in some sense makes her a far better wife than most. Very rare for Whites to have more than 3 kids now.

[Anonymous No.12581439]

>>12581431
I hate how many people pretend to care about astronomy just to take the moral high-ground in expressing their purely emotional disdain of billionaires. If they actually cared about astronomy they'd be pressing SpaceX to commit to launching telescopes and financing space observation capabilities themselves.

[Anonymous No.12581440]

>likely need to do work on SN9
>can't because winds are too high
could they install a windbreak around the launch pad or something?

[Anonymous No.12581441]

>>12581431
I would be absolutely fine with Starlink sats having max brightness so we all see the trains constantly circling above even in daylight. That'd be awesome, astronomers are dorks just build a space telescope you dips, you can't tell me you LIKE looking through our hazy atmosphere at shit.

[Anonymous No.12581442]

>>12581440
That's called a VAB.

[Anonymous No.12581447]

>>12581441
I want visible trains if only to blow the fuck out of the "space is fake" types, flat earthers, etc.

[Anonymous No.12581457]

SN10 has TPS tiles on its aft flap

[Anonymous No.12581458]

>>12581447
>"FAKE! those are just points of light put up there by lasers projecting on the firmament!"
Reminder that flat-earthers aren't real, they're all trolls 100%. I refuse to accept someone telling me they're a flat-earther, nigga stop lying no you ain't.
This tends to make them very mad, which I enjoy.

[Anonymous No.12581463]

>>12581458
I live by the ocean and every time a ship comes to port it proves that the Earth is round (by coming up over the horizon top to bottom). I refuse to believe that Flat Earthers are serious.

[Anonymous No.12581472]

>>12581457
Probably just for testing during movement/flight, doubt it's for orbit stuff.

[Anonymous No.12581473]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-xiWn4n8JE
based alert

[Anonymous No.12581478]

>>12581458
>flat-earthers aren't real, they're all trolls
At least one of them died trying to prove his cause. Also, does he count as TeamSpace?

[Anonymous No.12581480]

>>12581473
I'm gonna SHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE

[Anonymous No.12581482]

>>12581463
This has been debunked

[Anonymous No.12581484]

>>12581478
ACME rocket company

[Anonymous No.12581496]

>>12581478
That guy's friends said he "believed" in a flat earth for notoriety.

[Anonymous No.12581501]

>>12581478
Did that guy really buy into the memes? Maybe he just wanted to piggyback it in order to ride a homemade rocket, looks like it was fun up until it wasn't.

[Anonymous No.12581513]

>>12581496
>>12581501
Yeah I'm wrong and a faggot, turns out he was a daredevil first and foremost and used flat earth to advertise his tv show

[Anonymous No.12581514]

>>12581501
He literally died to a KSP staging fuckup, until I hear otherwise he's more based than any person in this thread.

[Anonymous No.12581515]

>>12581089
Probably because you can't aerobrake without an atmosphere? That means you have to throost to slow down to orbital velocity, or you won't get captured.

[Anonymous No.12581519]

>>12581439
I care about astronomy and am suspicious of Starlink for that reason. I will not press a private company to finance space observation, because I'm not a retarded commie.

What now?

[Jeff Who? No.12581520]

>Live chat replay was turned off for this video.

heh

[Anonymous No.12581522]

>>12581514
His rocket reached kike 500 feet. I mean it’s still cool but he could’ve gone higher up climbing a hill

[Anonymous No.12581524]

>>12581519
>I care about astronomy
Yikes look at the faggot over here.

[Anonymous No.12581525]

>>12581501
Why would anyone need to piggyback some retarded movement to ride a homemade rocket? One could get a decent paycheck and build one himself

[Anonymous No.12581527]

>>12581513
lmao that's pretty smart though, I hope flatearthers paid for his rocket in full.
>>12581514
What a way to go

[Anonymous No.12581528]

>>12581519
>I will not press a private company to finance space observation, because I'm not a retarded commie.
>private company
>commie

[Anonymous No.12581530]

>>12581473
wew. What payload was this thing supposed to be capable of? And what engines was it using in its 2nd stage?

[Anonymous No.12581531]

>>12581519
>I will not press a private company to finance space observation
It's a business venture, charge telescope time for observers on the ground. Hell make a fleet of 'em with your profits so waiting time for users is reduced.

[Anonymous No.12581551]

>>12581531
Or just fly to the far side of the moon to build a telescope while reviewing the images/signals from a spindly moon-wizard tower

[Anonymous No.12581552]

>>12581519
I dislike you but will enjoy Elon & the starlink competitors completely mogging you.

[Anonymous No.12581561]

>>12581519
Earth-based optical astronomy is not worth preserving. It's like saying we shouldn't pave roads because horses find dirt paths more comfortable.

[Anonymous No.12581575]

pretty fucking kino ngl

[Anonymous No.12581579]

someone calculate the total THROOOOOOOOOOOOST

[Anonymous No.12581590]

>>12581579
4 SRBs and five RS-25s?

[Anonymous No.12581595]

>>12581590
Are those RS-25s? They might be F1-bs

[Anonymous No.12581620]

>>12581575
>>12581579
Assuming those are 5 RS-25’s and 4 Shuttle SRBs, the total thrust would be 5X(2000kn) + 4X(12000kn). The vehicle would have 58000kilonewtons of force, or 83% the thrust of Superheavy.

[Anonymous No.12581623]

How did we go from this

[Anonymous No.12581628]

>>12581623
and this

[Anonymous No.12581630]

>>12581628
Why is it missing an engine

[Anonymous No.12581631]

and this

[Anonymous No.12581635]

>>12581630
It uses 3 SSMEs for LEO transport missions and 4 when using a giant upper stage. Back then, SSME’s costed $60 Million apiece.

[Anonymous No.12581638]

>>12581631
>>12581628
>>12581623
isn't this just literally SLS? Aside from the weird inline engine config

[Anonymous No.12581640]

this too

[Anonymous No.12581644]

>>12581638
No it uses an existing external tank with modifications. There’s no “extra segment” like with SLS

[Anonymous No.12581647]

>>12581530
What the fuck is that abomination?
Looks like something I built in KSP out of random parts.

[Anonymous No.12581649]

>>12581640
to THIS??

[Anonymous No.12581650]

>>12581635
Jesus, expensive AND ugly?
Lousy stinkin' rocket

[Anonymous No.12581681]

>>12581640
the "common tanking" lie never fails to piss me off. You can't just take an external tank and make it the structural core of a new rocket. They were always going to have to redesign the thing from the ground-up. This was a deliberate, malicious lie perpetuated by oldspace ghouls in order to swindle congress to fund their fundamentally flawed project that put contractors first and humanity's progress in space at the bottom. In a just world they would be thrown in jail.

[Anonymous No.12581687]

>>12581143
based

[Anonymous No.12581688]

>>12581620
>83% the thrust of Superheavy.
Woah... Is that the power of Hydromeme?

[Anonymous No.12581690]

>>12581143
I have seen the light

[Anonymous No.12581693]

>>12581650
someone must do a non grainy version of this pic

[Anonymous No.12581696]

>>12581688
Even the SRBs aren't throosty enough to compete with 28 Raptors.

[Anonymous No.12581715]

>>12581143
Jeff, this is embarrassing...and he says Blue Origin is his calling? It doesn't show

[Anonymous No.12581721]

>>12581361
>>12581347
just look at the thing, it's wobbly as fuck

[Anonymous No.12581724]

>>12581458
No, there are legitimate retards, but the flat Earth conspiracy was actually started as a way to poison the well.
>>12581561
I love how the horse/car analogies only get more and more relevant.

[Anonymous No.12581725]

>>12579005
NASA research is public - if they did some research on methane it will be there.

Smells like retarded redditor. Methane is exotic fuel because nobody wanted it in light of hydrogen and hypergols as well as the well known kerosene, it seemed like a dumb idea.

The unidentified flying towers down there in TX also strongly suggest the claim is bullshit.

[Anonymous No.12581727]

>>12581681
Still the idea was different to what SLS eventually ended up instead of being a cylindrical modified ET it was a completely new stretched ET

Still makes you wonder where we would be now if NASA never agreed to prop up Shuttle legacy hardware/facilities and instead made a clean start, new rocket.

[Anonymous No.12581731]

>>12581721
Is it more difficult because of it size though? Is it really fair to expect it to perform as well as a falcon 9?

[Anonymous No.12581737]

>>12581727
also 4 segment (same SRB as Shuttle) instead of the SLS new 5 segment

[Anonymous No.12581744]

>>12581721
they may need to work on their landing algorithm.

[Anonymous No.12581746]

>>12579770
My limit in furfaggotry. Though I admit I'll be willing to negotiate a bit further if a loli is involved.

>>12581681
The problem wasn't engineering - the contractors scrapped the equipment and tooling because the contract for the SLS was delayed too much. As a result they had the option to build the same old tooling... or upgrade. Here we are with the orange abortion.

[Anonymous No.12581778]

>>12581649
>this is the power of Old Space
>>12581361
If they don't have to repaint the logo every time, it's less. SpaceX had to stop repainting the X on the drone ships, it was too much work.
And they missed that far while going slow enough to hover.

[Anonymous No.12581782]

>>12581727
Ironically, it might have meant no spacex because NASA would have its rocket.
The SLS, through some exquisite divine irony, might have actually saved spaceflight by not flying.

[Anonymous No.12581821]

>>12579751
Alrigjt bro’s I’ve been designing a realistic interplanetary warship and I think I’m getting somewhere. Using a Pulsed Fission Fusion design like pic related, we can get a vehicle with an isp of 20,000 seconds. I also kept the Vehicle-only mass because it’s a neat thing. So that gives us a 100 metric ton “transporter.” But what about our warship payload? Well this was a bunch of (very rough) calculations but I took the mass of a “dry” C-130H Gunship (37 metric tons) and added the mass of an M1 Abrams tank (70 tons). Now I know that’s very rough but a C-130 has a fuckton of space inside it. It can’t definitely support a crew of at least a dozen for several weeks.

So the M1 Abrams would sit at the front of the C-130 body, in this scenario, and the 100-ton fusion “transporter” sits behind the C-130. The C-130 acts as the habitat and the Abrams is the “weapons room.” Combined, they mass 110 metric tons. However NASA states that a single person needs around 1 ton of consumables per year. 30 crew members on a three year mission thus need 90 tons of cargo, but we can round that up to 100 tons to be safe.

Anyhow that leaves us with 200 tons of payload for the fusion “transporter”, which itself masses 100 tons. The 300 ton “dry” Warship could hold 100 or so tons of Deutritium-Lithium propellant. With an isp of 20,000 seconds, that gives our warship a Delta V if 60 kilometers/second. Assuming a 30 kilometer/second boost and an equal but opposite deceleration at its destination, our warship can travel 1 AU in 2 months, or 5 AU in 10 months. It can travel from Earth to Saturn in a year and a half, or complete a round trip from there and back in three years.

>Atomic Rockets
>http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesignsfusion.php

[Anonymous No.12581823]

>>12581821
Ah shit forgot pic. Anyhow it’s no Rocinante but at least it’s not impossible.

[Anonymous No.12581836]

>>12581823
Atomic Rockets lets you link to specific points on a page, which is handy.

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesignsfusion.php#puff

[Anonymous No.12581840]

>>12581693
>he doesnt like the binary brush

[Anonymous No.12581861]

>>12581821
You have built an aircraft carrier/submarine. Gunships aren't meant to support their crew for extended periods of time. Tie it up to a mothership that can do to heavy burning and you can have something more reasonable.
I don't see the point of tanks when you can drop rocks at 60km/s however...

In addition wasting all that isp with so little fuel is a crime.

I think you are going at it with the wrong idea of simply transplanting an object from current warfare into environment it's not suited for - a bit like plopping a warhorse in space. Go at it with the idea you have 20k isp drive and see where it leads...

[Anonymous No.12581872]

>>12581861
Fun fact, at 20,000 Isp a mass ratio of 2 is enough for over 135km/s delta-V. Really crank up the armor on that design and you still have a capable interplanetary battleship.

[Anonymous No.12581893]

>>12581872
>>12581861
Thanks for the advice bro’s. I’m currently fixing the design and I might draw it on paper (plus some math too). Deuterium and Lithium are actually pretty damn dense so upping the mass fraction is a non issue. I do seem to have run into a bottleneck with the vehicle thrust, however. 27.3 kiloNewton’s is what’s listed on the Atomic Rockets page. Now keep in mind even a 1000 metric ton Warship could reach 60 kilometers/second in 25 days of constant firing. At that speed (60 km/s), the vehicle can travel 5 AU in just 5 months. The downside is that there are no “ALEX WE NEED A 10 GEE BURN PRONTO!!!!” scenarios. This thing takes a month to reach top speed and a month to slowdown.

[Anonymous No.12581907]

>>12581893
>The downside is that there are no “ALEX WE NEED A 10 GEE BURN PRONTO!!!!” scenarios. This thing takes a month to reach top speed and a month to slowdown.
Most fusion designs can have LH2 or water injected into the exhaust to trade Isp for thrust. That's actually how the Epstein Drives are supposed to work. If you want an Li6-D fusion design with water to increase thrust check out the Lithium Salt Water option.

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist2.php#lswr

[Anonymous No.12581910]

>>12581823
Look at that mass distribution and gigantic flimsy moment arm. You're not maneuvering worth shit in that without cracking into it like a slim jim. No thrust worth shit over short engagements either. If you're dead set on a long haul high ISP low thrust for a military vehicle my suggestion would be to have the capability to ditch and re-attach to the thrust structure at will, leaving you with a high T/W maneuverable vehicle without all the dead mass as necessary. I won't comment on the actual design because we don't have weapons optimized for the role right now and frankly it's too ridiculous to think about.

[Anonymous No.12581932]

they finally gave up on the InSight mole
>“We’ve given it everything we’ve got, but Mars and our heroic mole remain incompatible,” said HP3’s principal investigator, Tilman Spohn of DLR. “Fortunately, we’ve learned a lot that will benefit future missions that attempt to dig into the subsurface.”
I NEVER want to hear anyone say robots are better at exploring than humans ever again

[Anonymous No.12581936]

>>12581932
The absolute state of NASA

[Anonymous No.12581945]

>>12581932
Wait, how long were they sitting there trying to get it to work? I thought they were trying to stick that shit in the dirt like a year ago or more.

[Anonymous No.12581946]

>>12581932
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/nasa-insights-mole-ends-its-journey-on-mars/

[Anonymous No.12581961]

>>12581907
Thanks bro’s for the advice. So would the Water-injected LSW engine be a “switching gears” of the PFF engine or would it be its own thing, mounted to the side?

>>12581910
The Atomic Rockets design shown is designed for deep space exploration. It’s purposely low-mass and flimsy. The propellant is actually pretty dense and we could pack it together and save a lot of the “flimsiness.” I’m also thinking of having a “cone” of armor around the drive section of the vehicle. Instead of the giant rectangular radiators in the diagram, instead one can use a pair of fuckhuge “wings” that jut outwards instead of up and down the body.

[Anonymous No.12581962]

>>12581932
The power of diversity hires

[Anonymous No.12581963]

>>12581946
>754th Martian day, or sol, of the mission
Oh, that long. Jesus.

[Anonymous No.12581964]

>>12581932
>Bro robots do everything better bro
>spends over a year figuring out the most sophisticated way to hit a drill with a shovel

[Anonymous No.12581965]

>>12581932
Robot scientists on /sfg/: replacing humans is basically trivial and I have discounted it as a concern in my heavily automated vision of the future
Robot scientists at NASA: waking up in cold sweats every night with visions of a boomer in a suit wielding a trowel overshadowing their every achievement in the last 50 years in 20 seconds

[Anonymous No.12581969]

NASA timeline for various missions this year

[Anonymous No.12581975]

>>12581945
it landed on nov 26 2018

[Anonymous No.12581979]

>>12581969
>Artemis 1 launch
Nani?

[Anonymous No.12581981]

>>12581965
lmao it's true

[Anonymous No.12581982]

>>12581821
Why would you need such a large crew for a gunship? Why do you need the mass of an Abrams tank in armor up front? Why would the hab mass as much as a C130 when much of the C130's mass is in it's wings and engines and fuel tanks none of which would end up in space?
Make the crew 8, three nukes two of whom are dedicated engineers, two spacers who are secondarily engineers to perform any external maintenance necessary, two weapons operators and an officer. Instead of a worthless projectile weapon have it mount several free-electron XUV lasers that sipp power from the drive's capacitors. Lasers need no ammo, your drive and it's power stores are their ammo, they need fire only a very brief amount of time to destroy any ship or missile, and especially with FELs their range is probably greater than the mechanical accuracy of their own mount.
Also, why so little fuel? Double it to 100 tons, no shame in having a sub-1 mass ratio because energy weapons like lasers are better than guns anyways, better to give the ship more legs than weigh it down with near-useless armor or projectile weapons which couldn't hope to out-race a fusion drive equipped vehicle in any case.

[Anonymous No.12581983]

Why is it every rover moves at 4 mph? someone can surely build a rover that can traverse terrain safely and faster, why do none of them use lidar or automated driving/terrain navigation?

[Anonymous No.12581984]

>>12581961
How are you going to compactify a z-pinch drive? Pretty sure all the length there is keep the bits that don't like being subjected to spikes of neutron radiation away from the business end.

[Anonymous No.12581997]

>>12581932
>I NEVER want to hear anyone say robots are better at exploring than humans ever again
But they are. In theory. Once we get to robotics that advanced. Same old song as with SLS: give me five billions more, only five billions more...

[Anonymous No.12581998]

>>12581969
>Q1 Select companies developing artemis III human lander(s)
If they don't pick Starship, which is the only lander to actually exist in any capacity, then Artemis is truly a lost cause

[Anonymous No.12582007]

>>12581982
http://toughsf.blogspot.com/2019/02/cold-laser-coupled-particle-beams.html
>Destroys your long-ass "warship" with a procsima cannon mounted on a small NTR powered rocket
Nothin' personnel, kid

[Anonymous No.12582009]

>>12581983

[Anonymous No.12582013]

>>12581998
obviously they will. nasa is head over heels for spacex

[Anonymous No.12582044]

>>12581998
>lander(s)
>downselection to one lander is still on the table
They better not

[Anonymous No.12582056]

>>12581998
They should launch every type and see how they do.

[Anonymous No.12582060]

>Electron, Saturday, 0738 UTC
>SLS Hot Fire, Saturday, 2200 UTC
>SN9, Likely Saturday, ???
>LauncherOne, Sunday, 1800 UTC
>Falcon 9, Sunday, 1823 UTC
it should always be this busy

[Anonymous No.12582061]

Wild next few days

[Anonymous No.12582063]

>>12582060
>implying they won't all scrub

[Anonymous No.12582066]

>>12580687
Using periods instead of commas to denote 10^3 multiples is cringe bro

[Anonymous No.12582071]

>>12580810
Actually, the first fossils of life are cell wall coatings embedded inside extremely tin and tough crystals and the only reason they exist at all is because they formed in a small area of the world that just happens to have not been tectonically raped by now.

[Anonymous No.12582077]

>>12582061
where's the dark mode option?

[Anonymous No.12582079]

>>12580859
When steel rusts it expands, which is why all of the buildings made from steel reinforced concrete from the early part of the last century have started having problems. Internal rebar expansion puts a tension force on the concrete and since concrete is garbage in tension it cracks. Roman concrete is still here because it's unreinforced.

[Anonymous No.12582083]

>>12580952
Rocks get subducted.

[Anonymous No.12582085]

>>12582061
fuck virgin, they might be even more pozzed than BO

[Anonymous No.12582091]

>>12582007
Very interesting, if I'm getting this correctly what you could essentially do is use a cryocooled particle gun spitting out a combination of Cesium and Iodine, and then around it you'd have what is essentially just a slightly more spicy than normal laser pointer which would keep this particle beam coherent out to what is essentially an unlimited range, since light lag will throw off any attempts at target prediction long before the beam becomes too incoherent to be effective.
Seems like it would be most effective to use a small cluster of particle guns adjustable to produce overlapping spots at least out to one or two light-seconds (dependent on how fast the ships of the time are capable of dodging before you see their change in position), use the laser to "clench" all of these beams into one to minimize the surface area struck.
If memory serves this particle beam will strike the target with low impact but enormous force and essentially saw through it, since it has appreciable mass but is also traveling at high fractional C.

[Anonymous No.12582092]

>oneweb constellation size has shrunk to 6k sats
at least they arent out yet? that's still alot of launches to get that many sats in orbit

[Anonymous No.12582093]

>>12581089
Your landing burn becomes 11.3 km/s before gravity losses, which basically means to land you need to expend 13 km/s of delta V. That's what's brutal.

[Anonymous No.12582099]

>>12581107
>oceania a continent
fuck off with that

[Anonymous No.12582102]

>chart of where the planned CLPS landing sites are thru 2024

[Anonymous No.12582105]

When you think about it, without starlink F9 would hardly be launching.

[Anonymous No.12582106]

>sfg is just finding out about stans
oh no no no

[Anonymous No.12582108]

>>12582102
Looking forward to the swarm of private lunar landers to mog China

[Anonymous No.12582112]

>>12582105
I'm sure Russia could get a bunch of Baseduzes off the ground if somebody was buying launches.

[Anonymous No.12582115]

>>12582077
Dark Reader

[Anonymous No.12582117]

>>12582106
Fuck off and never come back

[Anonymous No.12582122]

>>12582106
it's a conflict between boomer stans, zoomer stans, and obvlivious stans

[Anonymous No.12582126]

>>12581961
>So would the Water-injected LSW engine be a “switching gears” of the PFF engine or would it be its own thing, mounted to the side?
It's an entirely superior form of propulsion. You can do torchship trajectories with a mass ratio of 20.

[Anonymous No.12582136]

>>12582105
That was kind of the point, the launch industry isn't huge and SpaceX had a ton of spare launch capacity sitting fallow, Starlink lets them productively make use of it. Even without that they launched more than double what ULA did last year though

[Anonymous No.12582137]

>>12581248
Corroborated
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/14/jeff-bezos-blue-origin-aims-to-fly-people-on-new-shepard-by-april.html
>Blue Origin aims to launch the second test flight within six weeks, or by late February, and the first crewed flight six weeks after that, or by early April, people familiar with the company’s plans told CNBC.

[Anonymous No.12582140]

>>12582137
If the plan is in April then it might only be pushed back to the end of the year.

[Anonymous No.12582143]

Onions

[Anonymous No.12582147]

http://toughsf.blogspot.com/2021/01/moto-orion-mechanized-nuclear-pulse.html

Thoughts on this?

[Anonymous No.12582148]

>>12582137
What the fuck are they even testing, how long they can milk daddy Bezos for money? Every launch is exactly the same

[Anonymous No.12582157]

>>12582106
anyone who says "stans" is a nigger to me

[Anonymous No.12582161]

>>12582148
uummmmmmm slow and steady ferociously :^)

[Anonymous No.12582166]

>>12582148
According to the article, the next flight is supposed to be a repeat of a "stable configuration" (the configuration has been stable for over 10 flights now) and will involve loading an unloading crew (which they can do without launching it, right?)

[Anonymous No.12582187]

>>12582166
Alex Mather you little shit top kek

[Anonymous No.12582189]

>>12582166
i'm loving the BO dogpiling lmao. this dude works in build reliability at spacex

[Anonymous No.12582193]

>>12582166
Jesus Christ that pic

[Anonymous No.12582196]

>>12582187
it's not real, but it should be

[Anonymous No.12582201]

>>12582196
You should have just let me believe

[Anonymous No.12582205]

>>12582196
It sounds so plausible that I just set my skepticism aside

[Anonymous No.12582207]

WHEN IS SN9 FLYING FUCKING DAMNIT
HNNNNNNNG

[Anonymous No.12582209]

>>12582189
Holy kek.

[Anonymous No.12582216]

>>12582207
Saturday

[Anonymous No.12582223]

>>12582189
Holy kek, I refuse to believe BO is even working on new glenn right now. Fucking useless company lmao

[Anonymous No.12582224]

>>12582216
You're delusional if you think they'll launch on Saturday

[Anonymous No.12582225]

>>12581408
I love this vid. Such a cocky bastard and the nagging insecure clingy wife, who deep down probably knew it was doomed even then.

[Anonymous No.12582226]

>>12582147
The only practical applications it talks about regard misfires and startup charges. It talks about batteries but glosses over the fact that hundreds of MW of input energy also means hundreds of MW of output energy to do those tasks which means hundreds of tons of batteries. Better off keeping the startup charges and instead of dedicating a container ship's worth of drive and batteries just making sure your warheads and automated safeties are secure and reliable to begin with.

[Anonymous No.12582232]

>>12582189
Brutal. How much more can bozo sustain?

[Anonymous No.12582238]

>>12582147
Seems cool but almost 500MW of power is so much energy I'm not sure what they'd do with it all if the vessel is civilian.
If it's a military vehicle on the other hand I'd say you could power a LOT of fucking particle guns with that much electricity.
>>12582207
This man is delusional, take him to the infirmary. There's no Starship on the launch pad, there can't be.

[Anonymous No.12582243]

>>12582224
kek

[Anonymous No.12582254]

>>12582224
3 hops in one day!

[Anonymous No.12582263]

>>12582254
If you think they'll hop 4 times in one day you're delusional

[Anonymous No.12582278]

post your predictions about first:
Starship orbital
Starship return from orbit
manned starship
unmanned starship to mars
manned starship to mars

[Anonymous No.12582280]

>>12582278
2021
2021
2023
2024
2028

[Anonymous No.12582286]

>>12582278
>Starship orbital
May 2022
>Starship return from orbit
May 2022
>manned starship
2025
>unmanned starship to mars
2029
>manned starship to mars
2031

[Anonymous No.12582289]

>>12582278
'22
'22
'25
'26
'28

[Anonymous No.12582306]

>>12582085
I guess one good thing about this industry is that if you suck it becomes obvious very quickly. The high difficulty makes certain that only the truly skilled will succeed.

Virgin's Spaceshiptwo also reminds me of the space shuttle. In the sense that it has some genuinely cool engineering but behind it all is a fundamentally flawed approach. I think Elon is right in that if something is super hard bordering on impossible then maybe you should rethink your direction.

[Anonymous No.12582309]

>>12582286
this

[Anonymous No.12582312]

>>12582306
Yeah, it's clear that it's an approach where the engineering designs didn't work out so they pivoted the business model instead of changing the design to fit what they business wanted to be.

[Anonymous No.12582316]

>>12582189
I'm fucking dying

[Anonymous No.12582327]

>>12582189
>350827 feet
That's a lot of feet. Is that what they call "legs for days"?

[Anonymous No.12582328]

>>12582189

[Anonymous No.12582332]

>>12582328

[Anonymous No.12582346]

>>12581478
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrAdayUh6-4

[Anonymous No.12582357]

>raptor plume is a beautiful translucent purple
>BE-4 is your standard fugly yellow
why even use methane if you're going to use it so badly you could mistake it for keralox

[Anonymous No.12582359]

>>12582278
>2022
>2022
>2029
>2033

>>12582189
If Starship does a 100 kilometer hop Bezos should consider suicide

[Anonymous No.12582362]

>>12582357
Reminder that BE-4 keeps eating itself when it tries to restart lol. ULA even said they had issues back in August

[Anonymous No.12582370]

>>12582357
That's probably the ethane, man BE-4 is going to be a shitbrick, it will be lucky if it even cracks the ISP barrier between Kerosene and Methane, plus with that extra ethane and whatever else is left in the LNG it will probably coke like fuck just like RP-1 engines rendering it completely pointless as a methane engine.

[Anonymous No.12582376]

>>12582346
>fades just before crash
lame. here's the full one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZOXh_GB9sc

[Anonymous No.12582377]

>>12582328
>this project has been in development for ~15 years
Kinda at a loss for words here.

[Anonymous No.12582383]

>>12582376
>>12582346
hope the g-forces from the launch knocked him out

[Anonymous No.12582382]

>>12582370
https://www.reddit.com/r/ula/comments/6znrgt/tory_bruno_ceo_ulalaunch_cdr_for_vulcan_rocket_by/dnmqcno/
I thought the BE-4 uses pure methane that was made from LNG?

[Anonymous No.12582394]

>>12582362
IIRC ULA claimed to have fixed the problem, although it's equally embarrassing in its own right for ULA, an oldspace org that can't even make its own engines, fix your design for you before you could

[Anonymous No.12582395]

>>12582382
Even worse. Why does their engine suck?

[Anonymous No.12582398]

>>12582382
Pretty sure the BE-4 uses LNG instead of pure methane like the Raptor. LNG has lots of extra shit in it that changes its burn characteristics.

[Anonymous No.12582399]

>>12582357
vs

[Anonymous No.12582410]

>>12582382
If it did use pure methane the plume would be semi-transparent, like Raptors. It's full of filth and wasted hydrocarbons though, so it isn't.

[Anonymous No.12582413]

>>12582328
Has any reporter with clout asked Bezos why New Shepard development has been slow and why hasn't it carried people yet?

[Anonymous No.12582434]

>>12582399

[Anonymous No.12582447]

>>12582410
I would suspect it to be down to fuel cycle moreso than LNG vs Methane. All of the exhaust from Raptor should be reacted, BE4 should have some colder unreacted products

[Anonymous No.12582457]

>>12582413
They have but after asking they commit suicide a few days later from five gunshots to the head

[Anonymous No.12582460]

>>12582166
pls be real

[Anonymous No.12582473]

>>12582370
>lus with that extra ethane and whatever else is left in the LNG it will probably coke like fuck just like RP-1
if they really are just using straight LNG their insistence on an ox-rich cycle makes a lot more sense.

And yeah, everywhere I look says "LNG" whereas raptor always says methane or methalox.

But why? Is it really so much more work to turn LNG into pure methane?

[Anonymous No.12582478]

>>12582434
looks like a purple-tinted SSME

[Anonymous No.12582485]

>>12582434
>better than an RS25
>cheaper than an RS25
>more reusable than an RS25
>isn't the RS25
Fuck aerojet

[Anonymous No.12582487]

there were some cool frame from spacex's under-pad SN8 cam

[Anonymous No.12582490]

>>12582457
You joke, but someone with fanfare seriously needs to ask some razor sharp questions about Blue Origin and how dedicated they really are about this space business. I get that not all companies and agencies can't sprint like SpaceX, but there is a difference between not burning your employees and taking a decade and a half to man-rate a hopper

[Anonymous No.12582494]

[Anonymous No.12582493]

>>12582487
you could see the staggered ignitions, too

[Anonymous No.12582499]

>>12582493

[Anonymous No.12582501]

>>12582494
I would move there and live in an airstream even if it meant just mowing all the grass or mopping the floors

[Anonymous No.12582504]

Sorry to break it to you, but the SSME had the best plume of ALL TIME

[Anonymous No.12582505]

>>12582501
Same, someone's gotta do the dishes right? Put me in coach I'll bring my own tent.

[Anonymous No.12582506]

>>12582499

[Anonymous No.12582512]

>>12582501
https://www.spacex.com/careers/?department=&location=Brownsville%252C%2520TX%252C%2520United%2520States

[Anonymous No.12582513]

>>12582504
The RS-25 is still an excellent engine despite the fuel type, oldpsace engineering, and the cuckbox

[Anonymous No.12582514]

>>12582504
if the by-product is water shouldn't there be a bunch of steam coming out of the engine bell?

[Anonymous No.12582521]

>>12582513
If you told me those boxes were single-use I would believe you.

[Anonymous No.12582523]

>>12582514
Steam turns clear when superheated. In addition to that, the exhaust is not pure steam. The RS-25 runs fuel-rich to boost efficiency

[Anonymous No.12582526]

>>12582521
Audible kek

[Anonymous No.12582537]

>>12581458
I'm sure the CIA invented that flat earth garbage. There's no way it came organically.

[Anonymous No.12582543]

>>12582521
>He doesn't know

[Anonymous No.12582545]

>>12582521
Those boxes are most likely reusable but cost just as much as the engines they carry and require refurbishment of the weather-stripping after every opening

[Anonymous No.12582546]

>>12582537
It started as a joke by some people lampooning creationists then it became it's own sort of spin off conspiracy grifter movement of extreme skepticism. Serves the same psychological purpose of any ideology or cult it just happens to be very silly.

[Anonymous No.12582564]

>>12582512
Fucking ITAR man. I'm not a chink pls let me weld starships.

[Anonymous No.12582572]

Ok so can starship go down to 2mm thin steel? 1mm?

[Anonymous No.12582573]

>>12582513

[Anonymous No.12582576]

>>12582572
Why? Do you want this to happen?

[Anonymous No.12582593]

>>12582576
What I want isnt important

[Anonymous No.12582634]

>>12582576
When I learned that Atlas wet-workshop stations were proposed and discarded I became mad 60 years after the fact. That would have been SO COOL.

[Anonymous No.12582636]

>>12582147
>what if we used nuclear blasts to turn a crank shaft for 2 seconds every blast

For
What purpose?

So he brings up the initial issue of wasting the nuclear blasts and ignores the obvious solution of SCALE EVERYTHING UP 100x ! Pulse unit costs stay the same after all

Some sort of ridiculous blog post about stealing thrust from your engine to provide electrical power.. but you are only thrusting for a few minutes in a flight of months

[Anonymous No.12582643]

>>12581134
Eminem has the most sales of any US musical artist ever

[Anonymous No.12582644]

>>12581151
Someone make him into a Pepe

[Anonymous No.12582645]

>>12582634
NASA is allergic to wet workshops or anything useful

[Anonymous No.12582648]

>>12581458
Real flat earthers exist my brother is one of them. He even has a flat earth map on the wall in his son’s room, and a bunch of other conspiracy books in his house

[Anonymous No.12582652]

>>12581363
>splashdown
meh

[Anonymous No.12582658]

>>12582572
pretty sure elon said that some areas might be <2mm. They're eventually going to optimize it.

[Anonymous No.12582662]

>>12582634
wonder if we'll see Starship wet-workshops. That would be a FUCKTON of space

[Anonymous No.12582676]

>>12582523
>Steam turns clear when superheated
cool, didn't know that

>In addition to that, the exhaust is not pure steam. The RS-25 runs fuel-rich to boost efficiency
ah, I see. I remember Hullo mentioning that the lighter the exit molecules the better, and of course you can't get lighter than hydrogen. Pretty cool how deliberately NOT burning some of it is superior.

>>12582513
that really is a hefty upper portion good lord. It's wider than the bell and the RS-25 has a bigass bell

>>12582648
why? It's clearly not a logic thing but rather these people are getting something out of it. But what? Is it in part of our catastrophically low faith in ruling institutions?

[Anonymous No.12582684]

>>12582676
It needs a fat turbopump to move all that h*dro/LOX.

[Anonymous No.12582690]

>>12581178
There's talks that New Armstrong isn't really a ship at all and it may just be a habitat.

[Anonymous No.12582697]

>>12582676
>It's clearly not a logic thing but rather these people are getting something out of it. But what?
"People whom I don't like are laughing at me for saying this so it must be true."

[Anonymous No.12582704]

>>12582662
Sure but a single Starship could launch 1000 modules. Gotta get your mind out of the "minimum number of launches to a achieve a goal" rut.

[Anonymous No.12582705]

>>12582690
If the next big project BO announces is not a fully reusable Starship-tier competitor, they are unironically finished.

[Anonymous No.12582710]

>>12582705
Trust me it’ll be a Starship competitor, but it’ll fly NET 2027

[Anonymous No.12582716]

>>12582676
>why? It's clearly not a logic thing but rather these people are getting something out of it. But what? Is it in part of our catastrophically low faith in ruling institutions?
Human society is fundamentally built on the concept of inherent trust in some way. Some people fail to understand this concept and end up just seeing potential distrust everywhere. Some of those people end up believing all sorts of conspiracy theories because those theories fit their world view of inherent distrust in anything that isn't immediately verifiable

[Anonymous No.12582718]

>>12582710
The unfortunate thing is that's incredibly optimistic. New Glenn has been in development for as long as F9 has been flying.

[Anonymous No.12582727]

>>12582643
I haven't thought about that guy since like 2006.
Is his daughter legal now?

[Anonymous No.12582732]

>>12582690
Is New Armstrong even a real idea from Blue Origin or is it just made up by space flight fan speculators?

[Anonymous No.12582742]

>>12582643
I very much doubt eminem is anywhere close to Michael Jackson

[Anonymous No.12582746]

>>12582684
BE-4 also has a fat pipe

[Anonymous No.12582751]

>>12582413
Has any reporter ever asked Bezos anything about BO? Fucking Tory Bruno is a better spokesman for them.

[Anonymous No.12582753]

>>12582732
NA is a real thing planned by BO. Bozos has talked about it.

[Anonymous No.12582764]

>>12582704
Starships could loft enough prefabbed modules for a spin gravity station.

[Anonymous No.12582765]

>>12582746
>the length
>the girth
>the curve

[Anonymous No.12582768]

>>12582704
>Gotta get your mind out of the "minimum number of launches to a achieve a goal" rut.
if Starship really is only a few million per launch then you're right. The containing factor would no longer be launch expense

>>12582690
habitat?

[Anonymous No.12582770]

>>12582732
I've read rumors on NSF forums that NA doesn't exist in any capacity. And I'd believe it: even with BO being as secretive as they are, I'd think something would've come out about it in the last few years.

[Anonymous No.12582771]

>>12582764
>spin stations
oldspace would lose their shit if someone cheaply makes one

[Anonymous No.12582773]

>>12582716
Reminder that the very term conspiracy theory was invented by intelligence agencies to discredit their shady as fuck activities.

[Anonymous No.12582778]

>>12582771
And then someone can strap some methalox tankage and a couple Vacuum Raptors to one end and move it up to L2 to dab on Gateway.

[Anonymous No.12582780]

>>12582746
You need a big pipe to move a lot of mass if your chamber pressure is shit I guess

[Anonymous No.12582783]

>>12582727
all three of em 8^)

[Anonymous No.12582793]

>>12582751
>interviewing Jeff Bezos
>there's a question about BO in your notes
>wtf, isn't BO the Jeff Who guy?
>discard it, it must have gotten mixed up

[Anonymous No.12582806]

>>12582751
anyone that ever "interviews" jeff bezos is usually only there to cradle his balls and stroke his shaft. maddening when you have elon taking on real shit and being asked more hardhitting stuff. bezos just cruises through without anyone ever asking him real shit. the dude is terrified of people realizing his ineptitude. he literally calls spaceflight his "calling" when he understands it as well as your average redditor.

[Anonymous No.12582815]

Just watched body odours latest suborbital launch.

>That landing burn

Legit thought it was about to tip over and crash, barely even made it onto the pad. Absolute fucking state.

[Anonymous No.12582833]

>>12582060
>>12582216
Source for SN9 hopping on Saturday?

For some reason nextspaceflight.com seems to have got rid of SN9 altogether after listing it previously

[Anonymous No.12582834]

NET Monday for SN9

[Anonymous No.12582838]

>>12582833
>>12582834
We got too delusional...

[Anonymous No.12582843]

>>12582833
It's listed as "NET January 2021", and I don't see anything indicating an indefinite delay, so I imagine the guy running it just got tired of pushing it back one day every day and is waiting for actual confirmation before listing a date.

[Anonymous No.12582844]

>>12581111
and they would have made it by now, if the founder hadn't gone all James Bond villain and killed a journalist in their personal submarine.

[Anonymous No.12582847]

>>12582815
same

>>12581288
>>12581269
>>12581347
the over-correction cycle on landing was pretty bad. Got to around a 20 degree lean before it fixed itself. It also barely made it back on the pad and took out a camera in the process. It didn't eat shit but they've still got some refining to do

[Anonymous No.12582849]

>>12582815
>>12582847
>15 years of development

[Anonymous No.12582850]

>>12582847
they're blaming ot on the wind lol

[Anonymous No.12582855]

Jeffrey Whomst

[Anonymous No.12582858]

>>12582847
Honestly it’s bizarre that this launch went so weirdly. They’ve had a perfect landing record and then today it almost eats shit. Strange.

[Anonymous No.12582861]

>>12582850
>wind is moving at walking speed judging by the plume
F9 is known for being a weather queen and lands better on a shaky barge on the waves

[Anonymous No.12582866]

>>12582768
Orbital habitat.

[Anonymous No.12582869]

>>12582850
Rockets need to handle the wind or they'll never bring down turnaround time waiting for calm skies. If monkeys can land planes in huge crosswinds, computers should be able to handle it.

[Anonymous No.12582870]

>>12582858
>perfect
It left a crater in the desert but they scrapped the footage so barely anyone knows about it

[Anonymous No.12582871]

>>12582858
It's nervous.

[Anonymous No.12582874]

>blue urine sends people to "space"
>market it as first commercial astronauts even though that's a lie
>spacex sends private astronauts to orbit a few months later
>jeff bozo hits em again
>welcometotheclub2.0.jpeg

[Anonymous No.12582876]

>>12582855
F O U S T

[Anonymous No.12582880]

>>12582874
I can’t believe that the orbital Dragon V2, which first flew in 2019, beat the suborbital New Shepard Capsule (it doesn’t even have a name lol fags), which first flew in 2015

[Anonymous No.12582883]

>>12582874
>Scaled Composites won the $10 million X Prize in October 2004 with SpaceShipOne, as the first private company to reach and surpass an altitude of 100 km (62 mi) twice within two weeks.
OH NO NO NO JEFF!?!

[Anonymous No.12582888]

New thread:
>>12582882
>>12582882
>>12582882

[Anonymous No.12582904]

>>12582166
>>12582189
>>12582328
kekkleplex

>>12582473
>Is it really so much more work to turn LNG into pure methane?
I guess you would just have to distill when liquefying it. Methane should condense at a different temperature.
- methane boiling point 111.6 K
- ethane boiling point 184.6 K
So in that case you could take it down to like 120k, throw out all the wet stuff, then continue chilling. It depends on if anything has a lower boiling point.

[Anonymous No.12582914]

>>12582843
Oh yeah you're right, I found it after scrolling a lot

[Anonymous No.12583005]

>>12581962
german contractors actually

[Anonymous No.12583154]

>>12581595
They aren't F-1Bs, they clearly have a hydrolox plume and also are using two hydrolox Shuttle ETs. I think they're supposed to be RS-83 engines.

[Anonymous No.12583177]

>>12581945
They spent literal years trying to get that piece of shit digging.

[Anonymous No.12583192]

>>12581983
whoa there anon that sounds risky, better take things a bit slower and have some meetings over the next decade to assess feasibility

[Anonymous No.12583237]

>>12582410
You're forgetting that BE-4 and Raptor don't use the same combustion cycle. FFSC is super clean. ORSC not so much. The issue is that in ORSC the fuel is pumped in as a cold liquid, which hurt mixture rate and therefore lowers combustion efficiency. This manifests as unburned, glowing carbon in the plume. FFSC has gas-gas mixing which means no carbon in the exhaust.

[Anonymous No.12583384]

>>12581496
Not for notoriety, he received lots of donations to build those "rockets". More than it cost him to build them.