/sfg/ - Space Flight General

[Anonymous No.14666274]

>Upcoming launch
July 17 1050 EDT - SpaceX - Falcon 9 - SLC-40, Florida - Starlink 4-22
July 21 1313 EDT - SpaceX - Falcon 9 - VSFB, California - Starlink 3-2
July 22 2000 EDT - Rocket Lab - Electron - New Zealand - Classified NRO payload

Previous: >>14661871

[Anonymous No.14666278]

fun times

[Anonymous No.14666283]

>>14666274
Planetshine is so cool bros.
KSP 2 will probably have it by default instead of with a mod.

[Anonymous No.14666294]

anime

[Anonymous No.14666298]

Comment Period on Draft Dragonfly Environmental Assessment Opens
https://dragonfly.jhuapl.edu/News-and-Resources/news/20220424.php

[Anonymous No.14666304]

>>14666274
Rogozin fired edition

[Anonymous No.14666310]

>>14666304
I think thats a wrong lens to take, the more realist take is a more militaristic hardliner got put into place. Rogozin's civilian governance was no longer needed.

>whats the difference?
The difference is whether you want to see it as a punishment or whether its a cynical minds behind the works of Russian geopolitical machine thats making spaceflight more dangerous

[Anonymous No.14666323]

>>14666294
how dare you

[Anonymous No.14666325]

>>14666310
Rogozin was sent to Donbabwe to get killed by ATACMS or GMLRS

[Anonymous No.14666327]

>>14666323
There will be anime on Mars

[Anonymous No.14666328]

>>14666325
He can hope, but again, the reason need not be Russians pleasing Americans. It could just be a warhawk Rogozin wanting to take over Ukraine's civilian territory governance himself. Either to prove how useful he is to Putin or to feed his own nationalistic ego or to feed his own personal "macho" ego.

[Anonymous No.14666333]

>>14666310
Or that all of Rogozin's cheerleading for the current regime finally paid off and his (potential) new job as an occupation administrator in Ukraine is actually a legitimate promotion.

Or no one is really being rewarded or punished and Russia is just trying to deal with institutional corruption by shuffling the deck chairs around and hopping that the new embezzling is better than the old embezzling.

[Anonymous No.14666336]

>>14666327
not if you want the colonists to breed

[Anonymous No.14666378]

Vote: https://www.strawpoll.me/46102781

[Anonymous No.14666411]

>>14666378
24 looks ridiculously good

[Anonymous No.14666418]

>>14666378
>>14666411
>Shooped out SpaceX logo
Bruh

[Anonymous No.14666430]

>>14666378
>>14666411
Looks better with paint

[Anonymous No.14666433]

>>14666430
It should be painted white on the other side.

[Anonymous No.14666436]

Even if Starship reaches orbit before SLS, SLS will still be ________

[Anonymous No.14666438]

>>14666436
Good paying union jobs

[Anonymous No.14666443]

>>14666436
funded in full including a $10 bil upper stage

[Anonymous No.14666449]

LIVE

https://youtu.be/21X5lGlDOfg

[Anonymous No.14666464]

LIVE

https://youtu.be/VCbhCtQhBKU

[Anonymous No.14666468]

>>14666449
cringe
>>14666464
based

[Anonymous No.14666469]

>>14666378
It will kaboom when it tips over. I guess that counts as sinking.

[Anonymous No.14666470]

>>14666378
I'm still amazed you can carry it like that. Like, why bother with a crawler? It's not like the wind will make it tip.

[Anonymous No.14666472]

SOON

[Anonymous No.14666477]

[Anonymous No.14666503]

Why are ISS cameras so shit?

[Anonymous No.14666507]

>>14666472
Why did Soviets choose dirty white colour?

[Anonymous No.14666512]

>>14666503
radiation damage and NASA’s refusal to use anything over 720p

[Anonymous No.14666514]

>>14666378
not your personnel data collection source

[Anonymous No.14666521]

>>14666512
"Radiation damage" is used as an excuse to buy radiation resistant cameras which the as good and ten times as expensive. Also, these cameras were probably "top of the line" back in 2004, so they'd be outdated anyway.

[Anonymous No.14666542]

>>14666521
You’re right about the second part, but the first part of your reply makes you a retard

[Anonymous No.14666568]

The first Martian colony will be Latin.

[Anonymous No.14666577]

It has docked.

[Anonymous No.14666578]

>ISS has docked with 25+ Dragons

[Anonymous No.14666579]

Someone on reddit said that Rogozins replacement was extremely opposed to using the ISS to film that Russian move becasue he didn't want Roscosmos's budget to be used for commercial ventures

anyone know if this is true?

I guess his hiring means that Russian spaceflight will be mostly nationalized for the time being

[Anonymous No.14666582]

>>14666542
If NASA bought less radiation resistant equipment it would have had to have been replaced several times over by now, and therefore would have been UPGRADED several times by now. Instead we've got an extra-expensive and extra-out of date camera that can keep trundling along because it's only half cooked.

[Anonymous No.14666586]

>>14666582
You sound like a dumb redditor. Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.14666587]

>>14666578
Ran through

[Anonymous No.14666589]

>>14666579
>mostly

[Anonymous No.14666590]

>>14666582
what if i cover a regular small 1080 camera in a metal bubble-like full of water container except for the lens, would last longer or its retarded.
something like pic rel, but its full of water (obv the electric components are dry and isolated)

[Anonymous No.14666603]

>>14666579
Uh I think that movie went trough a few trillion state approvals before they could do it. Russian space program was never private to any degree.

[Anonymous No.14666631]

Be honest with me

[Anonymous No.14666637]

>>14666582
It’s the government, what do you expect. Go back.

[Anonymous No.14666641]

>>14666631
Cherries are better than grapes and i’m tired of pretending they’re not. Also starship is a space plane.

[Anonymous No.14666712]

SLS is launching in August.
Meanwhile superheavy is already exploding without leaving the ground.

[Anonymous No.14666770]

>>14666582
How come the cameras on all the space missions last so long? Juno and the all the engineering cameras on Curiosity.

[Anonymous No.14666795]

>>14666590
There are highly effective metal alloys and composite materials that are lighter and easier to work with that block enough radiation. Water is thrown around as a good rad stopper because for manned missions they will need it anyway, and can be used as both a source of drink and a protection.

[Anonymous No.14666802]

>>14666712
>SLS is launching in August.
Press X to doubt

[Anonymous No.14666806]

>>14666579
I've been out of the loop for a while. So, lolgozin is finally gone?

[Anonymous No.14666813]

>>14666712
SLS will 100% be pushed back into September. Starship too though

[Anonymous No.14666819]

>>14666590
these cameras have an atrocious picture quality

[Anonymous No.14666835]

Why did Chuck Yeager go to space?

[Anonymous No.14666840]

>>14666835
*didnt, damn

[Anonymous No.14666846]

>>14666835
He was far too high-ranking in the military. He was a brigadier general in July 1969.

[Anonymous No.14666850]

>>14666846
Too bad. He legit could’ve been the main character of US spaceflight
>Born 1923 (younger than Glenn)
>Breaks sound barrier at age 24 (1947)
>Flies to space on Mercury at 38-39 (1961-1962 ish)
>Flies with Apollo 11 or 12 at age 46 (1969)
>Flies the first shuttle mission STS-1 at age 59 (1981)

[Anonymous No.14666876]

>>14666835
Didn't have the college education NASA said was mandatory for Mercury astronauts

[Anonymous No.14666882]

>>14666579

That's one hell of a big nose.

[Anonymous No.14666904]

>>14666850
>Flies the first shuttle mission STS-1 at age 59 (1981)
Chuck would have noped out of that deathtrap

[Anonymous No.14666908]

>>14666904
>Lands on Mars at age 59 (1981)
>Goes to Jupiter at 79 (2001)
>Peacefully dies of old age on Mars at 100 (2022)

[Anonymous No.14666964]

>>14666904
>test pilot
>refusing to fly a spaceplane
Unlikely

[Anonymous No.14666971]

>>14666795
thanks, i was wondering if its cheaper as well. I was looking for aluminum 6061 sheets for a cubesat and damn, they are expensive. I guess it could work if we are going the WH4K ork route.
>>14666819
I know, i posted the pic just for the desired shape of the container

[Anonymous No.14666977]

i just stumbled across this
>Life on Earth evolved in the ocean (buoyancy negating gravity). Later, mammals returned to the ocean. 38% gravity is enough for healthy development.
makes sense to me

[Anonymous No.14667010]

>>14666977
Im sure humans could easily gestate in lower gravity, but a) I doubt it would be healthy in microgravity aka if people are fucking en route to mars we don’t know how the fetus will develop as the mother is constantly floating around a space ship for months, and b) anyone growing up on the moon or mars might be fucked if they try to return to earth. Imagine living your whole life here and then your parents say they want to go back “home” where gravity is 3G. Everything would suck and acclimating would be impossible especially if you spent 10-15 years there from birth. Not to mention the long-term effects of an off world colony. Physiological changes would start to develop within the genetic population

[Anonymous No.14667024]

>>14666964
taking risks is one thing, certain death aboard the shittle another

[Anonymous No.14667031]

>>14666977
that's not how gravity works

[Anonymous No.14667054]

>>14667024
>>14666964
Test pilots were retardedly brave enough to fly anything lol

[Anonymous No.14667057]

>>14666378
It will blow up before making it to Hawaii.

[Anonymous No.14667080]

>>14667054
That's X-24, B no less
Yeager was flying on this fucking thing

[Anonymous No.14667098]

>>14667031
buoyancy can simulate low gravity, kinda like centrifugal force can simulates high gravity
it's not the same, but probably similar enough

[Anonymous No.14667138]

Chuck Yeager died 2 days before SN8 flew

[Anonymous No.14667141]

>>14667098
It doesn't simulate the effect of low gravity inside the body (organs, etc.), just your ability to move around. Only true free-fall (vomit comet, and actual skydiving, not those vertical wind tunnels) is the same, and it can't last more than a minute or two at a time.

[Anonymous No.14667142]

>>14667138
Yeager was anti-space

[Anonymous No.14667144]

>>14667142
I wonder if the lack of any hands on flying during normal operations had much to do with that.

[Anonymous No.14667152]

>>14667144
that's called coping

[Anonymous No.14667159]

>>14667142
Yeager was salty he didn’t get selected to fly into space which is kind of sad
> “Colonel,” Borman said when he presented himself before Yeager, who was seated at his desk going through paperwork, “I just got some good news.”
>“What’s that?” Yeager said, looking up with only passing interest.”
>“I was just selected to go to NASA and join the astronaut corps.”
>”Yeager said nothing at first, merely nodding. Then, at last, he spoke. “Well Borman,” he said, “You can kiss your Air Force career goodbye.” Then he looked back down at his work.”

> https://time.com/5919303/yeager-obit-right-stuff/?amp=true

[Anonymous No.14667164]

Jeb crashed his plane but it’s mostly intact and he’s fine.

[Anonymous No.14667168]

>>14667164
>Fiery but mostly peaceful landing

[Anonymous No.14667171]

>>14667168
For LARP reasons I don’t know whether to “retire” this vehicle or say it was repaired.

[Anonymous No.14667240]

>>14667171
She's done mate, have her hauled back to KSC and park her near the astronaut center

[Anonymous No.14667261]

>>14667164
how did you get overheating on a prop plane

[Anonymous No.14667278]

>>14667261
Random failure mod called OhScrap. That + Kerbalism + Hard Mode Career makes KSP incredibly fun and painful

[Anonymous No.14667294]

>>14667168
>mostly peaceful
mostly piecesful

[Anonymous No.14667317]

Launch stats this year

Imagine what it will be when New Glenn is flying Kuiper payloads

[Anonymous No.14667325]

>>14667317
>Imagine what it will be when New Glenn is flying Kuiper payloads
it'll be the 2030s is what it will be

[Anonymous No.14667329]

Who would be a customer of Starship besides spacex's own starlink?

Is there any company that needs that much space to send stuff into orbit?

[Anonymous No.14667331]

its over
https://twitter.com/TamithaSkov/status/1548380370038444034
>Direct Hit! A snake-like filament launched as a big #solarstorm while in the Earth-strike zone. NASA predicts impact early July 19. Strong #aurora shows possible with this one, deep into mid-latitudes. Amateur #radio & #GPS users expect signal disruptions on Earth's nightside.
its actually a bit worse than the current estimates

[Anonymous No.14667336]

>>14667331
Wasn’t there some sort of really accurate space weather proposal by NASA that ended up getting cancelled?

[Anonymous No.14667348]

>>14667331
>G2
nothing burger

[Anonymous No.14667350]

>>14667329
Bigelow could have been

[Anonymous No.14667353]

>>14667331
>Disables another set of Starlinks

[Anonymous No.14667360]

>>14667325
Didn't Blue Origin say that they were aiming for a max launch cadence of six flights per year?

[Anonymous No.14667364]

>>14667329
>company

[Anonymous No.14667368]

>>14667360
They are only building 2 NG’s period. They will have the launch cadence of ULA

[Anonymous No.14667369]

>>14667353
all starlinks*

[Anonymous No.14667372]

>>14667329
Skylab 2

[Anonymous No.14667373]

>>14667329
Shove enough shit up there and you can have near real time SAR / visible observation of the earth service. Is the market for that big enough? Who the fuck knows.

[Anonymous No.14667387]

>>14667350
Will bigelowe ever come back?

I miss those mfs like you wouldn’t believe

[Anonymous No.14667390]

>>14667329
>In 2021, the space agency awarded a sole contract to SpaceX worth $2.9 billion to develop the company's future Starship vehicle into a lander that can take humans to and from the lunar surface.

[Anonymous No.14667401]

>>14667329
If others aren't then they're at a loss. With that much capacity, SpaceX would be busy all year long, once Starlink 2 starts producing positive cash flow, then its all over for incumbents who want to sit still and dont do anything.

[Anonymous No.14667403]

>>14667387
Dead
They never actually did anything besides use nasa patents you know right?

[Anonymous No.14667447]

>>14667390
In the 60s when they were dreaming up lunar orbit rendezvous I'm sure they didn't dream up landing on top of a S-IVB

[Anonymous No.14667450]

>>14666298
>needing to assess the environmental impact of launching a probe
but why tho

[Anonymous No.14667453]

>>14667329
Is there even a need for a ship this large? What 100,000t object will it carry?

[Anonymous No.14667459]

>>14666436
Orange

[Anonymous No.14667466]

>>14666582
Retards are saying you are wrong but you are correct.

[Anonymous No.14667468]

>>14666641
Grapes are better for not going bad after two days but cherries have superior mouth feel and taste

[Anonymous No.14667471]

>>14666795
Literally just enclose the thing in a 12 inch radius HDPE sphere with a cone scooped out for the camera to look through.

[Anonymous No.14667483]

>>14667141
>and actual skydiving
Only for a few moments until the skydiver speeds up enough that drag starts to produce meaningful gee forces.

[Anonymous No.14667487]

>>14666795
>composite materials that are lighter and easier to work
Aren't gamma rays only blocked by mass?

[Anonymous No.14667489]

>>14666582
lmao they have COTS servers and laptops on the station

t. knower

[Anonymous No.14667490]

>>14667317
Wow, a whole zero additional launches!

[Anonymous No.14667494]

Is space manufacturing a meme?

[Anonymous No.14667502]

>>14667494
Yes until it isn't.

[Anonymous No.14667506]

>>14667317
As a euro i hate ESA and ariana space so much, fuckers should be at least in close second to NASA, leaving JAXA and ROSCOSMOS in the dirt, instead we are getting massively cucked by the french&italians with how fucking corrupt ariana space is and eats up most of the ESA budget.
ESA needs a european "spaceX" to stir up shit again, but that will never happen because people in power would crush a upstart like that in a instant here.

[Anonymous No.14667514]

>>14667494
Pretty much. The only one worth caring about is relativity but I’m betting they go under within the next 2 years

[Anonymous No.14667515]

>>14667494
Complete meme

[Anonymous No.14667529]

[Anonymous No.14667556]

>>14667494
There's a lot of space in the universe. We won't have to make any more for a very long time, if ever. I'm not sure how making more space could even be done.

[Anonymous No.14667567]

>>14667329
Starship is supposed to be competitive with F9 prices right off the bat, and $10 million per launch not long after. It can also put 21 tons into a GTO without refueling.
A $50 million starship launch carrying a single Geostationary satellite is legit cheaper than F9 alone.

[Anonymous No.14667579]

>>14666433
this and it needs a vertical stabilizer

[Anonymous No.14667582]

>>14667567
even if they're selling starship launches to GTO in the near term that's not going to be enough to make up for the billions in capital elon raised for development

[Anonymous No.14667602]

>>14667582
Starship could fly every single commercial launch Falcon 9 is making and it wouldn’t be enough. Starlink + Elon’s pockets are what will pay it off

[Anonymous No.14667609]

>>14666840
Glad to see she is safe

[Anonymous No.14667622]

1962: Dr. Krafft Ehricke on NASA manned interplanetary mission of the 1970s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFD_BJ0Otiw

[Anonymous No.14667634]

>A Hubble-size telescope at 546 AU can use gravitational lensing of the sun to directly image exoplanets with enough detail to visibly see clouds, oceans, continents, and vegetation
>Soientist predicts that it will be at least 50 years before such a telescope could be feasibly built
>Getting this telescope into position will be a monstrous challenge and a very long-term project
How do we fucking do this before we die bros? Voyager 1 is only at 156 AU ;-;

[Anonymous No.14667641]

>>14667634
Nuclear/fusion propulsion also make the telescope bigger

[Anonymous No.14667659]

>>14667609
>S24 uses protection

[Anonymous No.14667661]

>>14667641
Fusion is nuclear

Also first trans Space Force general when?

[Anonymous No.14667663]

>>14667634
> le gravitational lens telescope meme
deboonked years ago, its useless

[Anonymous No.14667667]

>>14667661
NUCLAER CHADS

[Anonymous No.14667675]

>>14667661
this feels like demons took control over the world and they are openly mocking us.
>>14667641
is there any, even small nuclear rocket or engine functional right now?

[Anonymous No.14667687]

>>14667634
here's the relevant paper
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ac5e9d
plus article from its author
https://kipac.stanford.edu/highlights/telescope-edge-solar-system
>>14667641
>make the telescope bigger
this seems to actually solve some of the technical problems mentioned in the paper. how much bigger, idk
>>14667663
>deboonked
this paper was published a couple months ago, and solves the problems of reconstruction. only "debunked years ago" because astroonomers believe spaceflight and telescope technology are destined to advance at an oldspace pace forever. half of them havent even heard of Starship

[Anonymous No.14667702]

The LC-39A chopsticks are half the length of the Boca ones. Absolutely wild SpaceX must really be confident in their landing ability

[Anonymous No.14667716]

>>14667702
Or they're eliminating catch from the 39A sticks

[Anonymous No.14667721]

>>14667675
Don't worry. They are importing millions of muslims at the same time, so it will solve itself soon. It just won't be nice, at all.

[Anonymous No.14667727]

>>14667489
/g/ practically threw a parade when they replaced XP with Debian on the ISS Thinkpads.

[Anonymous No.14667737]

>>14667721
My fiance is Muslim lol ahead of the curve bro

[Anonymous No.14667755]

>>14667716
Makes sense desu. The Falcon 9 pad is too close to risk it. But where will they land Superheavy then?

[Anonymous No.14667768]

>>14667675
>this feels like demons took control over the world and they are openly mocking us.
This is exactly what's happened

>is there any, even small nuclear rocket or engine functional right now?
The solution that would be the simplest in term of engineering and politics would be a nuclear powered ion engine. Ion propulsion is boring and conventional these days but has a lot of possibilities if you have the power to scale it up. An actual reactor would give that much power and then some, and would probably be necessary anyway since you're not going to get solar to work out past Jupiter.

If you're talking actual nuclear propulsion, we've have reasonably complete NTR designs since the 1960s, but those aren't going to get clearance to fly any time soon. A power only reactor would also have a lot less chance of breaking down than one that's serving double duty as the main propulsion system, and a high efficiency engine that can run for months or years at a time would be more attractive to a deeper space probe that something that can only provide small bursts of med-efficiency thrust.

[Anonymous No.14667816]

we cant go

[Anonymous No.14667818]

>>14667816

[Anonymous No.14667823]

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/12/elon-musk-being-allowed-to-make-the-rules-in-space-esa-chief-warns/

>The head of the European Space Agency has urged the continent’s leaders to stop facilitating Elon Musk’s ambition to dominate the new space economy, warning that the lack of coordinated action meant the US billionaire was “making the rules” himself.

>Aschbacher said Musk’s Starlink was already so big that it was difficult for regulators or rivals to catch up. “You have one person owning half of the active satellites in the world. That’s quite amazing. De facto, he is making the rules. The rest of the world including Europe...is just not responding quick enough.”

>“You have people like Elon Musk, just launching constellations and satellites and throwing Teslas up into orbit. We need to set common rules. Colonization, or just doing things in a completely deregulated space, is a concern,” he said on the sidelines of the New Space conference in Luxembourg.

>Aschbacher said it was clear that US regulators, as part of a national government, were “interested in developing not only the economy, but also certain dominance of certain economic sectors. This is happening...very, very, very, very clearly. And very strongly.”
Why are ESAtards such faggots?

[Anonymous No.14667827]

>>14667506
>how fucking corrupt ariana space is and eats up most of the ESA budget.
Hmmmm.

[Anonymous No.14667829]

>>14667823
Start deregulating and maybe you globalist fucking losers can hope to keep up

[Anonymous No.14667847]

>>14667823
>US billionaire “making the rules” himself
>just doing things in a completely deregulated space, is a concern
Ah yes, Europe needs more regulation to catch up with Musk. How retarded are they? It's astounding

[Anonymous No.14667848]

>>14667171
strongly consider suicide

[Anonymous No.14667850]

>>14667823
Lol build a reusable rocket then fuckin retards

[Anonymous No.14667856]

>>14667582
well they don't need to repay everything in a single year
they can recoup development costs over time, like quite literally every other business that ever existed

[Anonymous No.14667860]

>Saw a dude wearing an Apollo 11 shirt today

The anniversary is coming up...

[Anonymous No.14667861]

>>14667317
>Imagine what it will be when New Glenn is flying Kuiper payloads
It's kind of hard to imagine since the cylinder I'll be living in hasn't even been designed yet and the star it will be orbiting around hasn't been discovered yet and the mind digitization technology I'll use to send a copy of myself there at the speed of light hasn't been invented yet

[Anonymous No.14667863]

>>14667847
people like complaining about NASA's fuck fuck circus, but Europe is even worse by a big margin
while NASA has to express their unlimited submission one batch of corrupt jews, the ESA has to rim the asshole of dozens

[Anonymous No.14667867]

>>14667494
Varda Space Industries is not a meme
Varda Space Industries is not a meme is a meme

[Anonymous No.14667869]

[Anonymous No.14667873]

>>14667768
>The solution that would be the simplest in term of engineering and politics would be a nuclear powered ion engine
It's not like you can send off a 200 kW+ reactor with a sCO2 turbine and expect it to work flawlessly over decades with no maintenance. You could instead use a heavy but simple 40 kWe reactor similar to Kilopower, like what they're building for later Artemis missions, it would eventually be faster than Voyager 1 after accelerating for years but still very slow for a mission like what that Anon suggested. Multiple Kilopower like reactors wouldn't address the issue, just make it marginally faster. Solid core NTR would actually be worse than nuclear electric because of the lower delta-v. Fusion propulsion would be good if it existed, it doesn't.

Basically near-term nuclear technology would only work well for powering the telescope, not as propulsion. A large solar sail or a mag sail would be a better idea but still very challenging.

[Anonymous No.14667874]

>>14667869
It's funny that it looks like a boring construction site when nothing's happening

[Anonymous No.14667876]

What did he mean by this?

[Anonymous No.14667878]

>>14667876
either have cash on hand or you'll be selling your soul to the company store

[Anonymous No.14667881]

>>14667876
The rise of the actual civilian astronaut
(also people who immigrated to the US early on usually didn't have money to do so, so they came in under indentured servitude contracts)

[Anonymous No.14667884]

>>14667876
He's making stuff up.

[Anonymous No.14667897]

demon core drives when?

[Anonymous No.14667898]

What was the first kerosene rocket engine in the US? Every liquid rocket engine in the US until 1956/57 seemed to just be hypergolic. Even the Redstone didn’t use kerosene; it used Hydyne (hypergolics) and liquid oxygen

[Anonymous No.14667905]

Okay which of you guys did this?

>>>/n/1808680
>>>/n/1808680

[Anonymous No.14667911]

>>14667905
The "space board" schizo.

[Anonymous No.14667916]

>>14667911
Its kind of based, especially the OP picture

[Anonymous No.14667921]

>>14667818
Even the Mexican Welders prefer SLS. It's over for SpaceX!

[Anonymous No.14667923]

>>14667905
Its some tranny. They made a big fuss months ago

[Anonymous No.14667925]

>>14667897
if you're gonna bother, might as well go NSWR

[Anonymous No.14667928]

>>14667916
90% of the posts are copy-and-paste from /sfg/.

[Anonymous No.14667932]

Never forgot how absolutely fucking atrocious the starship update was. No new news, just fucking cringe elon memes and dogshit audience questions. Had it not been for Dodd saving the day and asking about the engines, the whole night would have been pointless

[Anonymous No.14667934]

Missed the music in the previous thread. This is my favourite:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCawZmV09MQ

[Anonymous No.14667935]

>>14667932
Kek it was so bad

[Anonymous No.14667939]

>>14667932
Sounds like you're not the audience.

[Anonymous No.14667940]

>>14667898
i think it was the navaho g-26 booster but i'm not 100% sure on that

[Anonymous No.14667941]

>>14667932
Dodd might be a soi faggot redditor, but he's not irredeemable

[Anonymous No.14667971]

>>14667905
the collage/anti-anime schizo ofc

[Anonymous No.14667976]

>>14667971
They are not the same person, as much as you're trying to conflate the two and also clump every anti-anime poster into one.

[Anonymous No.14667982]

>>14667823
>12/5/2021

[Anonymous No.14667983]

>>14667827
Ariana space gets a slice of every part of that.

[Anonymous No.14667984]

>>14667976
I disagree. Its very likely the same person. That person is also that retarded SpaceX concerned troll

[Anonymous No.14667986]

>>14667898
Goddard was working with LOX/gasoline back in the 1920s if that counts.

[Anonymous No.14667989]

>>14667925
gotta walk before you run
>5000 Isp
>100 kN thrust
that's plenty for now

[Anonymous No.14667991]

When will we see SLS/New Glenn(Assuming it is ready in 2023)/Starship/Falcon 9/Atlas 5 all on their pads at once?

That will be a sick sight. Throw in Relativity's 2 rockets in there as well/

[Anonymous No.14667994]

>>14667991
>New Glenn(Assuming it is ready in 2023)
that's a very silly assumption

[Anonymous No.14667998]

>Russia decides they want to start building reactors again
>Instead of building something sensible as a first step they try to build complex 1 MWe space tug that they couldn't afford despite that it would only be good for outer planet missions and it would have a 2030 launch date
What the fuck was the point of this? It wasn't a paper spacecraft, they had real hardware for it.
>>14667984
Take your meds

[Anonymous No.14668001]

EARTHER (derogatory)

[Anonymous No.14668006]

>>14667928
No they really aren't

[Anonymous No.14668010]

>>14667923
>>14667911
>>14667971
Kek the anime fag trying to act like thise are the same person

[Anonymous No.14668014]

>>14667984
>SpaceX concerned troll
Learn English chink

[Anonymous No.14668015]

>>14668006
Yes they are, I've had my posts stolen before. That thread is over a month old.

[Anonymous No.14668018]

>>14667998
Good union jobs

[Anonymous No.14668019]

>>14667971

[Anonymous No.14668020]

>>14668010
>doesn't know the rocket equation
>doesn't know about the word filter
>uses an anime website despite having some weird obsession against it
>only "contributions" are reposting the same pics/vids and collages every other thread
you don't belong here

[Anonymous No.14668021]

[Anonymous No.14668024]

Please for the sake of thread, ignore the anime schizo
>14668020

[Anonymous No.14668026]

>>14668019
right, so they sent an operative here to try to discredit the world's most right-wing form of mass media: japanese animation

[Anonymous No.14668030]

>>14666274
you guys been watching the latest season?

[Anonymous No.14668034]

>>14668030
Rich man bad show got tiring

[Anonymous No.14668035]

man its really fucking depressing that this schizo has decided to live in this thread
once you realize how many times it posts and resets its IP per thread you start to become sick
you can see when it resets its IP when a new poster appears in the /n/ thread

[Anonymous No.14668036]

>>14668030
We only talk about SENPAI on thursday nights EST

[Anonymous No.14668041]

>>14668035
Go back you dumb fuck

[Anonymous No.14668049]

>>14668030
Not there yet, midway through S2.
just started watching last week

[Anonymous No.14668050]

>>14668041
i know you've posted over 50 times in this thread
its pathetic

[Anonymous No.14668060]

I'm gonna take a nap and when I wake up the thread will probably be in better shape. From my perspective it's indistinguishable from time travel.

[Anonymous No.14668061]

>>14667634
Imagine the bandwidth bottlenecks

[Anonymous No.14668062]

Any updates on the booster? Is it red?

[Anonymous No.14668065]

>>14668062
*ded

[Anonymous No.14668069]

>>14668062
B7 still inspection

B8 almost finished (just need engines)

[Anonymous No.14668094]

>>14668020
You already posted this on your other thread

[Anonymous No.14668098]

>>14668060
kek based napper

[Anonymous No.14668106]

those poor fucks thought we'd have colonies across the solar system by now

[Anonymous No.14668127]

>>14668106
We would if it weren't for [redacted]

[Anonymous No.14668128]

>>14668106
There where people in this world who technically could have seen the first flight from the wright brothers as children and watch the first steps on the moon as elders.

[Anonymous No.14668129]

>>14668106
>pic from 1981
naw they probably knew the good days were over by then

[Anonymous No.14668140]

[Anonymous No.14668143]

[Anonymous No.14668146]

>>14668127
Racist much? [redacted] lives matter

[Anonymous No.14668149]

>>14668140
>>14668143
at some point you gotta whip out the power washer

[Anonymous No.14668154]

>>14668149
The soot is load bearing now

[Anonymous No.14668167]

>>14668129
They probably though shuttle would fly 50 times a year and allow moonbases and stuff by the 90’s

[Anonymous No.14668175]

>>14668167
Replace
Shuttle with starship
Moonbases with marsbases
90's with 30's

[Anonymous No.14668185]

>>14668167
if you watch the abc broadcast of sts-1 gene cernan is having to tamp down expectations from the network commentators who were still buying into the 50-flights-a-year stuff. like they were still expecting it to be a good thing overall but they knew it wasn't going to live up to the hype.

[Anonymous No.14668199]

>>14668175
Starship right now probably can’t do that but imagine how refined Ship 40 will be or something, only a few years from now. The shuttle was never iterated on

[Anonymous No.14668208]

>>14668175
>They probably thought starship would fly 3 times a day and allow marsbases and stuff by the 30’s

[Anonymous No.14668227]

[Anonymous No.14668228]

>>14668208
>he doesn't know about the bases built during the Great Marspression

[Anonymous No.14668252]

The Carina nebula is fucking massive and I wish it could be seen with human eyes

[Anonymous No.14668266]

>>14668227
God, what a slutty station.

[Anonymous No.14668279]

>>14668227
200 BILLION DOLLARS

[Anonymous No.14668286]

>>14668175
>>14668208
if they shot for the moon but ended up with the iss then we're shooting for mars and ending up with a moon base

[Anonymous No.14668287]

Found a piece of green opaque ceramic/glass today that glows slightly green in the dark way after dark (actually how I spotted it), around the size of a fingernail
Put it in a small bag an took it home
What are the chances It's a small piece uranium glass?
Sorry that this is not strictly spaceflight related but the rest of the website is too retarded to ask

[Anonymous No.14668335]

>>14668286
What if we just shoot at the people who want a moon base?

[Anonymous No.14668341]

>>14668287
probably a meteorite
you should eat it and see if you get any super powers

[Anonymous No.14668345]

>>14668287
couldn't be much else

[Anonymous No.14668353]

>>14668287
snort chopped up spiders with it and become spiderman

[Anonymous No.14668357]

>>14668353
>>14668287
He's correct. You should do this. I am a medical doctor. I am your doctor and this is medical advice.

[Anonymous No.14668361]

>>14668287
Might just be something coated with phosphorus

As far as I know uranium glass doesn't glow in the dark

[Anonymous No.14668365]

>>14668287
Might just be a CIA agent. See if it tries to get you to commit acts of terrorism.

[Anonymous No.14668385]

>>14668287
>the rest of the website is too retarded to ask.
> the rest
I hope you have learned something with those retarded try to be funny answers, and no, is not uranium glass, sorry.

[Anonymous No.14668389]

what would be the best spot to put the equivalent of an L2 depot in a principia-free RP1 install? i can see a few options but none of them seem great.

>just ahead of the moon's SOI in the same orbit:
advantages: easy to plan interplanetary escape burns in mechjeb, can easily access all parts of the lunar surface
disadvantages: substantial delta v penalty to rendezvous with it over the real L2 unless you do some oberthing low over the moon along the way, which would be a pain
>high equatorial lunar orbit:
advantages: easy to rendezvous with minimal delta v penalties
disadvantages: interplanetary burns would be a pain in the ass to set up, inclination changes needed for polar landings
>polar orbits:
advantages: easy to hit the poles
disadvantages: literally everything else

[Anonymous No.14668392]

>>14668015
Nothing in that thread looks stolen you butthurt troon

[Anonymous No.14668397]

>>14667874
It kind of is a boring construction site. The fun stuff happens over at the launch pad.

[Anonymous No.14668406]

>>14668385
The funny joke answers are a lot better than paranoid schizophrenics replying dead serious with their 2000 word paragrapgh on why israel or aliens are responsible for this attempt on my life.
Any idea what it might be then? Usually something needs energy to keep glowing in the dark

[Anonymous No.14668410]

>>14667582
Raised capital doesn't need to be paid back, it's not a loan. It's money investors shovel into the company because they own stock and want SpaceX to become more of a cash cow.

[Anonymous No.14668413]

>>14667609
They invented paint that protects from blacks

[Anonymous No.14668418]

>>14668413
>>14667609
better safe than sorry

[Anonymous No.14668419]

>>14667634
Plasma magnet sail to get out to 546 AU very fast, fusor plasma propulsion to stop in position, fission reactor to power the fusor engine and plasma magnet sail, simple as.

[Anonymous No.14668421]

>>14668392
>gaslighting
Go back, schizo. No one cares about your knockoff /sfg/

[Anonymous No.14668422]

>>14667737
Charles?

[Anonymous No.14668426]

>>14668392
dont you have a dead thread to bump?

[Anonymous No.14668427]

>>14668418

[Anonymous No.14668430]

>>14667823
I will literally fly to europe and bomb the fucking EU headquarters or whatever if they fuck with spaceflight. You hearing this three letter agents? I will commit terrorism if it means spaceflight is not hampered by sore losers.

[Anonymous No.14668432]

>>14667861
>and the star it will be orbiting around hasn't been discovered yet
Doubtful

[Anonymous No.14668433]

>>14667876
Less elitist and more accessible than modern spaceflight

[Anonymous No.14668442]

WE'RE GONNA FLY

[Anonymous No.14668449]

>>14667876
I receive: your life and labor on mars
You receive: horsey

[Anonymous No.14668460]

Get the fuck on board anon! We're going to the Moon!

[Anonymous No.14668462]

>>14668460
This reminds me of that one Ace Combat mission where you have to defend a Shuttle launch

[Anonymous No.14668467]

>>14668460
nice to see lego standing up for what will be the rocket of the century. 100 years sls

[Anonymous No.14668469]

>>14668389
Equatorial high lunar orbit.

[Anonymous No.14668470]

>>14668175
Difference being the Shuttle was the result of crooked legislators and air force autists, and Starship is the raw autism of one man taken physical form.

[Anonymous No.14668479]

>>14668470
Elon musk dodnt do ANYTHING. he just orders a weekly catalog for biggest rocket dildos ever and bought the most expensive one. THAT'S IT

[Anonymous No.14668487]

>>14668479
He literally changes the design daily with the engineers. And he literally started the company to do this.

[Anonymous No.14668490]

>>14668479
Whatever board you came from, return there now and do not come back

[Anonymous No.14668500]

>>14668490
I was linked from /n/ so maybe you guys can stop shitting up our board with this nonsense
>>14668487
How is anyone this gullible. Regurgitating engineers does not mean he is one. It means he's a parrot

[Anonymous No.14668511]

>>14668500
Go back, homo

[Anonymous No.14668527]

>>14668500
Why are you gay?

[Anonymous No.14668533]

>>14668432
kek, I'm glad that's the part you found implausible

[Anonymous No.14668545]

vidya tournies in space
the science? to see how microgravity impacts critical thinking under stress.

[Anonymous No.14668547]

>>14668500

[Anonymous No.14668575]

I hate hobbyist astronomers so much, they're almost always self-important retards who think they're contributing to science. Just look at the stars and shut up.

[Anonymous No.14668578]

who cares

[Anonymous No.14668593]

>>14668578
>Who ca- OMG a satellite just ruined my epic exposure of a galaxy that has been photographed a million times, SpaceX must pay for this!

[Anonymous No.14668600]

Why did the Soviets cancel their moon landing? They built the fucking rocket and almost got it working and then they blueballed the world. We could’ve had Sea Dragons or some shit if they went to the moon damnit

[Anonymous No.14668603]

>>14668600
>POST-SATURN MOD. CARRIER

[Anonymous No.14668605]

>>14668600
Why did they fall for the N1 meme instead of assembling a Moon mission with smaller rockets?

[Anonymous No.14668608]

>>14668469
yeah it seems like there's the fewest question marks with it. i guess you can just move any interplanetary spacecraft back into earth's SOI a month before the transfer window to plot the burn too.

[Anonymous No.14668613]

>>14668605
Exactly. The L3 lunar stack was only 70 tons, too.
The original plan for the N1 was a smaller vehicle capable of 40 or so tons to LEO.

[Anonymous No.14668615]

>>14666507
Easier to maintain? I remember some early ones that were almost bronze/orange, but not sure if it was Krechet, Orlan, or maybe both. And then there is Strizh, which was brown.

[Anonymous No.14668618]

>>14668030
>>14668036

[Anonymous No.14668620]

>>14668600
>They built the fucking rocket and almost got it working
they never even made it past the first stage in a launch
>>14668605
same reason the americans didn't. orbital assembly wasn't going to be ready by 1970.

[Anonymous No.14668632]

>>14668620
>orbital assembly wasn't going to be ready by 1970
Not with that attitude.

[Anonymous No.14668637]

>>14668620
The Soviets figured out autonomous docking in 1967

[Anonymous No.14668644]

>>14668637
And immediately regretted it to the point they almost destroyed Mir testing a solution to avoid using it

[Anonymous No.14668648]

>>14668637
they were regularly botching their docking attempts with salyut until the late '70s. on top of that you have to figure out cyrogenic propellant storage since the LOX is gonna have to sit there until crew arrives. you're gonna have to redesign all your systems to loiter in orbit for weeks or months depending on how many protons explode on the way up.

[Anonymous No.14668649]

>>14668644
That was 20 years later. Anyways you just need an unmanned launch to carry the TLI stage and a manned one to carry the crew + lander. The US did it with Gemini

[Anonymous No.14668652]

>>14668644
Problems with Igla happened post 1970. The point doesn't make sense, a manned Moon mission with the N1 would still require docking.

[Anonymous No.14668651]

>>14668648
The Soviets used LOX and Kerosene for their lunar braking stage. If they could handle lox for at least 4 days, there’s no doubt they could make it to at least a week.

[Anonymous No.14668653]

>>14668652
a mission that requires one docking carries a lot less risk than a mission that requires five

[Anonymous No.14668654]

>>14668653
It would happen before the astronauts ever left Earth

[Anonymous No.14668656]

>>14668654
but your LOK would be destroyed just the same

[Anonymous No.14668662]

>>14668656
I think out of all the potential problems the mission would face, storing LOX for an extra day is far down on the list, but there's no reason why they couldn't have used hypergolics like the Apollo Service module which did the TLI.

[Anonymous No.14668666]

lmao this talk of Soviet moon landings reminds me that the Russians want to do their own Apollo capsule

Somehow it's going to get to lunar orbit and back with 21.3 metric tons

[Anonymous No.14668673]

>>14668651
if everything goes as planned a week would be fine. but this is the 1960s USSR we're talking about so you have to account for failed launches and the time it would take to get the backup stacked and rolled out. then all your standard launch delays and scrubs on top of that.
>>14668662
SPS was just for lunar insertion/escape but they could have gone with UDMH for TLI, true. that's just even more mass you're having to throw into LEO.

[Anonymous No.14668695]

>>14668673
I’m going to do some math when I get off work to investigate this. Do note that maybe they could use something bigger than Proton. I think a vehicle with 30 R-7 derived RD-107 engines could work; at least you could test fire the engines before flight. You just need 40 tons to LEO to do the L3 mission in two flights

[Anonymous No.14668700]

>>14668673
My mistake, I also mistook LOK for LOX
>>14668695
Another option to consider is putting separate Soyuz in low Moon orbit for them to use on the return.

[Anonymous No.14668704]

>>14668030
>NASA is wearing Mark III spacesuits, while soviets looks like out of some B-movie

[Anonymous No.14668706]

>>14668704
fatty spacesuits for chubby chicks

[Anonymous No.14668707]

>>14668704
>3 missions
>instantly become reliant on the one that worked
I hope it don't be like this irl

[Anonymous No.14668712]

>>14668704
And of course Helios have the most modern stuff.

[Anonymous No.14668713]

>>14668500
>

[Anonymous No.14668716]

>>14668713
don't do tj like that

[Anonymous No.14668724]

>>14668716
indeed i must have gotten my yt intellectuals mixed up.

[Anonymous No.14668728]

>>14668712
That boy ain't right

[Anonymous No.14668730]

>>14668704
This Mars program is going to be the downfall of the USSR, calling it now. They are either going to have to depend on the US and acknowledging that they have the better technology or work with a private company which goes completely against the USSR's beliefs.
In S4, there will either be no USSR or it will be in deep decline.

[Anonymous No.14668735]

>>14668730
>S4
please god no

[Anonymous No.14668739]

>>14668700
I’m doing the math and a 2 launch strategy of a 45-ton class launcher seems impossible, even with high isp kerosene stages. 3 launches definitely would work, maybe with even lower payloads to LEO like 35-40

[Anonymous No.14668746]

>>14668735
S4 was confirmed ages ago dude

[Anonymous No.14668751]

>>14668739
What I'm envisioning is two launches, one would be manned LK with extra consumables and a larger descent module so it can do insertion and set up for the landing burn, maybe encapsulated into a launch abort system. The other launch would just be a Soyuz LOK that would take the astronauts home. Is that possible?

[Anonymous No.14668752]

The Lunar LOK Soyuz massed 9.95 tons. The LK lander was 5.56 tons. Together, they’re 15.51 tons.
The Block D Braking stage for lunar orbit insertion and the initial part of the LK’s landing burn masses 18.2 tons wet and 3.5 tons dry. When combined with the Soyuz and LK, the stack massed 33.71 tons.
The Block G trans lunar injection stage massed 61.8 tons wet and 6 tons dry.
The entire stack, called L3, had a mass of 95.51 tons. But this had to be boosted into orbit first.
Theoretically, a 35 ton launcher could carry the Soyuz, lander, and braking stage into LEO, then two more 35-ton launches could build the halved Block G. Thanks for hearing my TEd talk

[Anonymous No.14668754]

KSP bros how do I aeroshell for Eve landing of my mini-rover

I could stuff it into a 2.5m tube and put an adapter lid on it or leave the launch fairing on all the way out I suppose

[Anonymous No.14668756]

>>14668746
yeah but sometimes tv shows just confirm new seasons that never happen to gin up some media buzz

[Anonymous No.14668769]

>>14668754
Myself, I keep the fairing on from launch 'til near landing, you just need to design the cruise stage to deliver power/comms. You could put a fairing-enclosed payload inside a second payload for launch if you wanted to, nobody can stop you.

[Anonymous No.14668789]

>>14668751
1/2
Yes, but with a 60 ton launcher.
Launch 1 carries the LK. I assumed the LK would sit atop a “vanilla” Block D braking stage, as this would help it enter low lunar orbit and also land. LK + Block D masses 23.76 tons, and has a total Delta V of 3.3 km/s. Block D has to slow the LK to 100 m/s before detaching which is basically a lunar landing in and of itself, so we can subtract 1.7 km/s from the original amount. We can also subtract the 0.9 km/s required to slow the LK into orbit. This gives us an extra 0.7 km/s, which can help boost the the stack to the moon.
TLI is 3.2 km/s, so we need a “Moon Boost” stage with 2.5 km/s. I assumed a conservative 5 ton dry mass for the stage, and an isp of 349 seconds - the same as the engine on the Block D.
LK + Block D + Dry Moonboost Stage = 29 tons. With an isp of 349 seconds, you need 31 tons of propellant to get a Delta V of 2.5 km/s, which is needed.
In summary, the full stack would be 60 tons. But this is enough to place the LK and Block D into lunar orbit and eventually land.

Launch 2 carries the crew. The Soyuz LOK also sits atop a Block D. The 9.95 ton Soyuz and the 3.5 ton dry/18.2 ton wet Block D mass 13.45 tons dry/28.15 tons wet. This gives a delta V of 2.5 km/s.
The Soyuz LOK already can leave lunar orbit on its own, but the Block D would use 0.9 km/s to slow it into lunar orbit. This gives us 1.6 km/s to help with the initial TLI.
Combining LOK + Block D with the initial “MoonBoost” stage gives a dry mass of 33 tons. With an isp of 349 seconds, you’d need twenty tons of propellant to get the needed 1.6 km/s to start the TLI burn. The Block D would finish then fire again to enter lunar orbit.
The total mass of the “Lunar Soyuz” stack is 53 tons - slightly less than the LK Landers’

Long story short, the Soviets would need a big rocket, but not the N1. 60 tons to LEO is a lot, but it’s also a lot less than the N1.

[Anonymous No.14668797]

>>14668751
>>14668789
2/2
The USSR never really made a real design for something this big but the original 1962 design of the N1 is similar ish. It could only put 75 tons into LEO and used “only” 24 NK-15 engines; negating the inner cluster of six. This produced a liftoff thrust of 34,000 kilonewtons, which is less than the Saturn V. This is about the same amount of thrust of 30 RD-107 engines used on the R-7 family. 30 engines is a lot, but at least the RD-107 could be static fire before flights.

You could also theoretically do this mission with four launches of a 35 ton to LEO vehicle. Maybe use a Soyuz service module to help “ferry” the MoonBoost stages to the lunar payload stacks, or maybe just have the payload rendezvous with the MoonBoosts.

TLDR; the USSR would need a big rocket like the N1 but slightly smaller and simpler to do this in two launches. The N1 had issues because of its complex first stage engines and plumbing. Without that insane plumbing and those shitty engines, you have a vehicle which arguably could work, and be flying before our timeline’s N1, too.

Note that 60 tons to LEO is the same payload as Falcon Heavy when expended, or the triple core “fat” Atlas Phase II. Maybe the USSR could forgo making giant stages like the N1’s and cluster four common ones around a central booster. If it was powered by the RD-107, it would legitimately be like some freaky gigantic version of the R-7.
A final note is that the USSR never used hydrogen in their lunar plans for some reason. Hydrolox stages would save a lot of weight here.

[Anonymous No.14668803]

>>14668789
>>14668797
>TLDR; the USSR would need a big rocket like the N1 but slightly smaller and simpler to do this in two launches.
The real issue is falling for the reusable astronaut meme, it should be a one way trip. Surely they could have found suicidal and/or terminally ill soviets to train as cosmonauts

[Anonymous No.14668816]

>>14668575
anon is buttmad he can't afford a telescope

[Anonymous No.14668821]

>>14668816
Astronomers are plebs who can't 360 no scope

[Anonymous No.14668827]

>>14668821
well yeah, astronomers need the scope in the tele otherwise they can't tele the telescope to scope the stars televisually

[Anonymous No.14668830]

>>14668756
You will get 100 years old Kinoman in season 5 and you will like it.

[Anonymous No.14668832]

>>14668575
They can contribute to science, check out the work NASA's doing with stellar occultations for the Lucy and New Horizons missions

[Anonymous No.14668839]

>>14668821
say that to my face, ignoramus

[Anonymous No.14668840]

>>14668830
lmao you're reminding me of that shit KSR pulled in Blue Mars by giving everyone magic gene therapy rejuvenation treatments

[Anonymous No.14668842]

>>14668840
oh god they're not going to do that for S4 are they

[Anonymous No.14668843]

>>14668840
Isn’t Blue Mars’ timeline super compressed? It only takes 200 years to make Mars Earth 2.0

[Anonymous No.14668852]

>be nerd
>have shit eyesight
>have to invent something that allows me to look at the sky
>other nerds do the same and claim they invented a new field of science
>four centuries later normies still believe it

[Anonymous No.14668853]

>>14668843
They went hardcore on the terraforming to an absurd scale: mass produced lichen seeding airships with wind-powered incubators, a giant sun focusing mirror (built from materials derived from the hollowing-out of Phobos I believe), several operating moholes, ice delivered from some redirected trojan asteroids, and so on

In the face of all of that it makes the rabid red mars faction a little more believable

[Anonymous No.14668857]

>>14668852
watch thunderf00t videos if you dont believe me

[Anonymous No.14668858]

JWST is looking at Trappist tomorrow

[Anonymous No.14668868]

>>14668858
does it say for how long? supposedly there should be 24 transit observations of trappist this year. im worried the spectra resolution will be way worse for rocky planets + thin atmopheres than for wasp 96b

[Anonymous No.14668869]

>>14668858
neat, i wonder what we will learn about it-could we get atmospheric composition readings? imagine if we find a shitload of oxygen

[Anonymous No.14668872]

>>14668868
>>14668869
Well we’re about to find out. It’s weird how this is a “do-or-die” situation. We’ll find out if Trappist is even worth thinking about in the future desu. For all we know, they’re airless rocky dead worlds. Or we find oxygen and 1) confirm alien life and 2) make interstellar colonization one step closer

[Anonymous No.14668880]

>>14668858
Any idea when we are going to get a glimpse of the data? I'm pretty sure if there's anything of note NASA will make up a mysterious announcement for a presentation in 2 months

[Anonymous No.14668893]

>>14667823
>The rest of the world including Europe...is just not responding quick enough
And whose problem is this? No Musk's, that's for sure.

[Anonymous No.14668902]

>>14668893
It'll be a problem because currently NGOs don't have to give a shit about national space treaties IIRC

This hasn't been a big deal prior to 2010 or so because private companies didn't have the cash or the capability to do the kinds of things SpaceX is planning, but it's making people acutely aware that there IS in fact, an entire universe out there out of the reach of governments

Hell the US Supreme Court refused to hear a case back in 68 because it "didn't have jurisdiction in outer space"

[Anonymous No.14668908]

>>14668872
Trappist is 40 light years away. If you have the technology to make that voyage, you have the ability to make your home anywhere, not just on habitable worlds.

[Anonymous No.14668923]

>>14668010
kek, the anti-anime fag trying to act like everyone talking about him is "the" anime fag

[Anonymous No.14668928]

When is orbital test happening
got bored of the routine and falcon launches, a few years ago they got me all hyped up, but now it just leaves me empty
still waiting for neutron and relativity

[Anonymous No.14668939]

>>14668928
elon says august, but he said that last year too so who knows…

[Anonymous No.14668951]

>>14667876
We're bringing back Indentured Servitude and That's a Good Thing.

[Anonymous No.14668956]

>>14668030
Watched episode 1 of the new season then lost interest.

[Anonymous No.14668989]

>>14668010

[Anonymous No.14668998]

>>14667823
>doing things in a completely deregulated space, is a concern
fucking bureaucrats

[Anonymous No.14669011]

>>14667823
Unregulated business is how your descendant will end up as wageslave Expense belters or as the Martian dictator peons in a space-dystopia.

I can imagine your face if Starlink accidentally trigger a Kessler effect and suddenly it's no longer ok for you to shill the billionaire who ruined everyone's dreams because of his hubris and unchecked power.

Also the FAA is in the same shit.

[Anonymous No.14669019]

>>14668389
Lagrange L1/L2, no compromise, then you build the space elevator.

[Anonymous No.14669027]

>>14669011
8/8

[Anonymous No.14669028]

>>14669011
>Unregulated business is how your descendant will end up as wageslave Expense belters or as the Martian dictator peons in a space-dystopia.
Sounds perfect
Workers shouldn't have rights

[Anonymous No.14669039]

>>14669028
okay, rabbi

[Anonymous No.14669052]

>>14668712
Not gonna lie, got some space-marine vibes here. But still these shoulders are looking weird

[Anonymous No.14669062]

2027, it happened

[Anonymous No.14669063]

>>14669028
faggots will seethe, but the truth is that workers rights, environmentalism, safety concerns and over-regulation cripple industrial capacity wherever they exist. these things won't exist in earth-independant settlements in the medium to long term.

[Anonymous No.14669083]

>>14669063
>workers rights, environmentalism, safety concerns and over-regulation cripple industrial capacity wherever they exist
I'd say industiral disasters, strikes, lawsuits and workplace deaths also do that

[Anonymous No.14669085]

proxima centauri b, nothing lives there

[Anonymous No.14669088]

https://youtu.be/K_8QKIJnjN0
New video

[Anonymous No.14669139]

This is a real picture.

[Anonymous No.14669178]

>>14669085
Nope, that is a galaxy with MIRI.

[Anonymous No.14669206]

>>14669178
the post remains correct

[Anonymous No.14669216]

>>14668700
>low Moon orbit
Yeah, they had just discovered the mascons in 1968, that would have been a hell of a surprise to be the first to find them by parking something there for orbital assembly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_concentration_(astronomy)
>It was only in 2001 that the mascons were mapped and the frozen orbits were discovered.

[Anonymous No.14669217]

Is this the first Moon mission in 2022?

[Anonymous No.14669220]

>>14668575
Hobby astronomers still make new discoveries from time to time. I don't know why they make you so mad.

[Anonymous No.14669231]

muh stop littering mars retards have made mars guy mad. i despise earthers so much

[Anonymous No.14669265]

>>14669216
Funny that you think this a gotcha, perturbation would only be a problem over months and non-frozen LLO station-keeping requirements are still low. It's pretty much the same orbit the Apollo CSM was put into, just off by 10 km. NRHOfags begone.
>>14669220
Amateurs can make a discovery in any field, the fact remains that 99% of amateur astronomers are retards doing astrophotography for attention on social media and they don't contribute shit beyond launching campaigns against satellite constellations.

[Anonymous No.14669273]

>>14669265
>NRHOfags begone.
No argument there, that shit has one purpose, as a crutch for the Sub Lunar System.

[Anonymous No.14669278]

>>14669265
>Amateurs can make a discovery in any field
I don't think amateur physics is a very big or credible field these days.

[Anonymous No.14669286]

>>14668730
I think the USSR in SENPAI is like China right now, communistic in name only, and full of "private" companies led by party officials.

[Anonymous No.14669297]

>>14669265
> the fact remains that 99% of amateur astronomers are retards doing astrophotography for attention on social media and they don't contribute shit beyond launching campaigns against satellite constellations.
And does your whining here contribute in any way to developing rockets or colonising Mars? No, but you do it anyway.
And amateur astronomy was big before social media.

[Anonymous No.14669344]

That new EP of For All Mankind sucks
That subplot of that dumb looking lunar spaceplane making a refueling at this weird alt history Mir was so dumb
not to mention the increasingly bad CGI

[Anonymous No.14669348]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snz7JJlSZvw

[Anonymous No.14669355]

>>14669217
Rocket lab just launched a lunar mission not too long ago.

[Anonymous No.14669368]

>>14669355
lol, right, I forgot about it

[Anonymous No.14669370]

>>14669344
>All this effort to try and get things right
>They just plain run out of fucks to give

[Anonymous No.14669375]

>>14669217
>Launch date: 3rd August
>Orbital insertion: 16th December
What's up with those missions? Apollo needed only 3 days to reach the Moon.

[Anonymous No.14669389]

>>14669375
They don't have a proper third stage so they do little perigee kicks with overgrown RCS for months to raise orbit.

[Anonymous No.14669438]

>>14669344
>flying through space like an aeroplane
>center of thrust nowhere near the center of gravity

jesus what fucking garbage lmao

[Anonymous No.14669439]

>>14669389
2nd stage of Falcon 9 can't do the job?

[Anonymous No.14669474]

Elon himself inspects booster 7 at starbase soon after it shat itself
https://youtu.be/nvi_4Z7m5pE?t=300

[Anonymous No.14669476]

[Anonymous No.14669478]

>>14669439
Interplanetary/Lunar direct inject costs extra iirc.

[Anonymous No.14669503]

>>14669344
>lunar
>spaceplane

[Anonymous No.14669506]

> return from Mars
> this is your life now

[Anonymous No.14669526]

>>14669506
>return

[Anonymous No.14669554]

>>14669088
cool youtuber anon. subscribed

[Anonymous No.14669575]

>>14669344
Space autists are absolutely cucked when it comes to realistic space fiction.

[Anonymous No.14669578]

>>14669575
It hurts that James Cameron is trying harder than anyone else

[Anonymous No.14669591]

Explain this

[Anonymous No.14669592]

Weather is 60% GO.
https://youtu.be/7VWcjgYfJ9U

[Anonymous No.14669596]

>>14669591
No

[Anonymous No.14669598]

>>14669591
sea levels rising, terrifying stuff

[Anonymous No.14669628]

>live at t-4:00
lmao

[Anonymous No.14669632]

>>14669628
based
f9 launches would be boring by now if the landing wasn't so fucking cool

[Anonymous No.14669636]

>>14669591

[Anonymous No.14669638]

go

[Anonymous No.14669641]

[Anonymous No.14669644]

LIVE
https://youtu.be/OEzxoW5DEVM

[Anonymous No.14669645]

>goto youtube
>ANOTHER starlink launch
wtf didn't they do one just yesterday

[Anonymous No.14669650]

MaxQute

[Anonymous No.14669656]

>>14669650
And what a MaxQuite it was

[Anonymous No.14669657]

>>14669645
They're building shell 3 right now, aren't they? Need a lot of launches for that many satellites.

[Anonymous No.14669661]

First stage undergoing RUD

[Anonymous No.14669662]

Oh shit that's a hurricane or some shit

[Anonymous No.14669665]

What's all that debree on the left side?

[Anonymous No.14669667]

First stage is done for

[Anonymous No.14669668]

>>14669474
And people keep saying "Elon isn't an actual engineer and doesn't participate in the development".

[Anonymous No.14669671]

Elon can't keep getting away with it

[Anonymous No.14669672]

>successful landing even in a storm
wtf

[Anonymous No.14669673]

>>14669667
Another happy landing

[Anonymous No.14669674]

landed

[Anonymous No.14669676]

this is the first one I've seen without any clapping
are we done clapping? Or is it just because it's early on the west coast

[Anonymous No.14669679]

>>14669667
wrong
spacex is so fare ahead of the whole industry it's embarrassing desu

[Anonymous No.14669685]

>>14669676
we have had no clapping landing for awhile now

[Anonymous No.14669692]

>>14669685
They clapped for the previous landing

[Anonymous No.14669694]

[Anonymous No.14669699]

>>14669019
you literally can't do lagrange points with the patched conics and my pc can't handle the n-body mod

[Anonymous No.14669701]

>>14669694
Thanks Anon

[Anonymous No.14669709]

Why is For All Mankind obsessed with using spaceplanes to go to the moon? Mars is a bit more understandable but still. If the writers actually cared about realism they’d use Sea Dragon or reusable spaceplanes to help build and refuel lunar transfer vehicles or some shit.
Also why does the show fall for the “dude just launch from the moon!!!!” meme? Building in lunar orbit or the Earth-Moon L2 is a great idea. But going from the surface loses you 1.7 km/s if you want to go to Mars.
The show also treats nuclear thermal engines like some magic device which can not only SSTO a space shuttle, but also bring it to the moon and back.

[Anonymous No.14669711]

>>14668666
Thank God it’s only empty talk. Otherwise some cosmonauts would die.

[Anonymous No.14669720]

>>14669503
direct ascent lifting bodies are a legitimate concept! don't bully lunex!

[Anonymous No.14669726]

>>14669591
there's another, bigger antipodal north american continent. only one can survive.

[Anonymous No.14669731]

Why is Falcon 9 so reliable?

[Anonymous No.14669738]

>The show For All Mankind is unrealistic and therefore bad, i am going to spend a significant amount of time shitting on it in order to display how smart i am and how much more i know about space travel than the writers of the show because i need people in this thread to view me as smart and give me validation via (you)'s about how smart i am because i am very insecure please i am smart, validate me please
t. Everybody in this thread

[Anonymous No.14669744]

>>14669731
because it's been launching at a rate of more than twice a month over the last 5+ years

[Anonymous No.14669756]

>>14669738
Space is something I autistically care about. If someone gets something wrong while patting themselves on the back for being realistic, it is irritating. It’s like watching a biopic movie and knowing they fudged the details

[Anonymous No.14669758]

>>14669709
The show is more interested in making dramatic television that targets normies rather than presenting a plausible what-if scenario. Any realism the show contains is just window dressing

[Anonymous No.14669767]

>>14669676
I clapped, you just couldn't hear me because I'm very far away.

[Anonymous No.14669768]

>>14669738
Imagine how good it could be if it was actually realistic though.

[Anonymous No.14669770]

>>14669768
no

[Anonymous No.14669778]

>>14669738
in a shocking turn of events people get passionate when a niche subject they're interested in gets presented in an inaccurate way. at least there's someone in this thread wise and aware enough to call out this truly disgraceful behavior

[Anonymous No.14669779]

>>14669709
NASA's big dumb SSTO that goes from Earth's surface to Mars' makes no sense to me, not that it matters now that they crashed it like a bunch of idiots. "hurr durr muh first steps!" yeah but now you're stranded and need the help of a real mission to get home, dipshits.
Also how did Helios lander have enough fuel to make it almost down to the surface, then back up to orbit, then back down to the surface again? I guess it could've gotten more fuel from the hotel/ship but it's still a pretty damn small lander. Is it going to have to do multiple trips to get all three crews back up to orbit or is the show just gonna kill off most of the cast before that becomes a problem?

[Anonymous No.14669784]

>>14668287
99% chance it’s just construction slag
>t. geologychad

[Anonymous No.14669787]

>>14669476
The LM had nothing but sovl

[Anonymous No.14669789]

Guys i know the show seems realistic to a layperson but i'm no not a layperson, i have extensive knowledge about space and space travel therefore when i tell you that the show is dumb and unrealistic you can know this comes from a deep understanding of these topics and just how incredibly smart i am!

[Anonymous No.14669794]

Armageddon is a good space movie

[Anonymous No.14669795]

>>14669794
We know.

[Anonymous No.14669803]

>>14669789
>Just consume the media and don’t think about it!!!!!

>>14669794
Kino soundtrack

[Anonymous No.14669808]

>>14669794
the always-burning solids mounted to the shuttles were just nuclear SRBs. it was a courageous nod to realism to include them and the writers should be applauded.

[Anonymous No.14669821]

>>14669794
>Armageddon
Unapologetically fudges things and presents itself as a fun hero movie with a NASA skin texture. Great heroes. Kino
>For All Mankind
Lies to the audience by presenting itself as “historical fiction” while taking every liberty it possibly can in a slimy way. Dumbass CGI monkeys include the cross section lines from the schematics on the rockets. Shit characters. Designed for identity politics. Cringe

[Anonymous No.14669828]

>>14669794
>I COULD STAY AWAKE
>JUST TO HEAR YOU BREATHIN

[Anonymous No.14669833]

>>14669794
Finally, a sane take in the thread

[Anonymous No.14669844]

>>14669794
I like that one too. I'm pretty sure I've still got pic related knocking around the bottom of a bin out in the barn someplace.

[Anonymous No.14669850]

>>14669844
>>14669794
>Armageddon understands in space refueling better than For All Mankind

[Anonymous No.14669858]

>>14669850
Hahahah

[Anonymous No.14669874]

>>14669850
I can't name any of the three characters that died on the way to Mars, but 20+ years later I still remember the ones who didn't make it home from the Asteroid.

[Anonymous No.14669890]

>>14669738
> this tipe of turn off your brain post
> on /sfg/ of all places
buddy, i think you are lost. This is not /tv/

[Anonymous No.14669908]

>>14669794
It didnt try to be realistic or didnt care from the concept alone (sending miners as astronauts instead of the opposite). But it was a hero save the humanity type of movie which i enjoy a lot (the core, the edge of tomorrow, sunshine).

[Anonymous No.14669913]

>>14669908
I like 2012 and Day After Tomorrow too. They're shlock, but the fun kind.

[Anonymous No.14669936]

>>14669738
Report the junk and move on.

[Anonymous No.14669937]

>>14669297
>not the heckin astronomerinos
Alright you can stop pretending you're not one. Please tell me what object you have discovered with your Fisher Price telescope and urban viewing location

[Anonymous No.14669947]

Elon was personally inspecting the engines, what a fucking leader, take note Jeff, this is how it is done.

[Anonymous No.14669956]

Which is more realistic, The Expanse or For All Mankind?

[Anonymous No.14669958]

>>14669947
> Not great not terrible

[Anonymous No.14669963]

>>14669956
Well, there's no aliens in For All Mankind.
Yet.

[Anonymous No.14669971]

>>14669937
You completely misunderstood my post then. It's Ok, English is hard.

[Anonymous No.14669974]

>>14669963
having no aliens is unrealistic

[Anonymous No.14669984]

>>14669738
>NOOOOOOOO you can't just dislike something I like, I have to have group approval to like something!!!

t. low T

[Anonymous No.14669997]

>>14669956
SзNPAI is more realistic, but its because the expanse is too far into the future. I didnt like the expanse btw. the only kino characters die on ep 2. Then is downhill from there. The space battles are cool but they are rare.

[Anonymous No.14670012]

>>14669997
The protomolocule shit ruined everything, fuck mystery goo and whoever made it.

[Anonymous No.14670020]

>>14669947
Elon is currently in Greece when his employees are wageslaving

[Anonymous No.14670025]

>>14669971
I didn't, I'm just not going to pretend that you didn't previously mention the discovery of new objects in defense of amateur astrofags' unwarranted self-importance. I don't know when discovering rocks no one cares about became synonymous with science. If I wanted to discover a dumb rock no one has seen before I would go on a walk in the wilderness, it wouldn't make me a geologist

[Anonymous No.14670028]

>>14669344
>that animation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68ugkg9RePc

[Anonymous No.14670038]

>>14670025
Not the same person.
And you've yet to cite any evidence of this "self-importance". I've never met an amateur who thought what they were doing was important to science, I don't think you have either. Very few even submit data to archives, so how could they possibly believe this?

[Anonymous No.14670053]

>>14670038
>And you've yet to cite any evidence of this "self-importance"
I already posted a guy that thinks his shitty telescope is comparable to JWST because it looks similar in the visible spectrum, take your medication

[Anonymous No.14670058]

>>14669794
It's a bit unrealistic, but the portrayal of the Russian is so accurate it gets a pass.

[Anonymous No.14670064]

>>14670058
Fuckin' love that guy

[Anonymous No.14670067]

Anyone ever read this PDF on Mir? I think it pretty cool.

[Anonymous No.14670094]

>>14670053
That's not what he said though, is it? Your remedial comprehension skills strike again. The post said "I think a 10 billion dollar 24 foot telescope might be slightly better than my 6'' newtonian in my driveway". As in it is better, and any non-autisic person can read the sarcasm in "slightly". And note there is zero mention about "science" here.

[Anonymous No.14670111]

>>14670012
The Expanse setting also depends on the Epstein drive, just as magic as Star Trek warp drive/dilithium crystals

[Anonymous No.14670123]

>>14669709
>Why is For All Mankind obsessed with using spaceplanes to go to the moon?
Those studios wouldn't follow the recommendation of a consultant they hired themselves. Someone must have said "Spaceplane would look really cool and more high-tech" and that's all way they cared about.

>If the writers actually cared about realism they’d use Sea Dragon or reusable spaceplanes to help build and refuel lunar transfer vehicles or some shit.
If we assume Sea Dragon/spaceplane to be our equivalent of a Starship, yeah I guess. The setting have to many competing polity to accept big project like an orbital ring, space tether.

To truly make use of the moon you'd need a Lunar elevator see >>14669019, or magnetic ship accelerator/catcher.

>>14669738
If everyone were yesman who never complain you wouldn't have such a series in the first place, it would be replaced by a cheapos space opera with not a single shit given to realism or even self-consistency.
At least we wouldn't complain so much if SENPAI compensated on other aspects.

Cherish your (You) insecure anon.

[Anonymous No.14670130]

>>14670094
The guy was doing "me vs JWST" comparisons to show of his skill in taking images that literally anyone else with a small telescope could take and you're an absolute retard for handwaving it as sarcasm. Funny that you're ignoring all the people who came out against Starlink and said their "work" was being disrupted, very few of them were real astronomers yet almost all of them would cite how amateur astronomers are important to science, as you did, before you moved the goal posts in defense of your bad argument, twat.

[Anonymous No.14670132]

What is this SENPAI meme

[Anonymous No.14670136]

>>14669794
It was funny but I do wonder if they intentionally made it like a silly B-list catastrophe movie, to the point of being satiric, or if it was simply an accident of not giving a shit over appearance.

[Anonymous No.14670153]

>>14670136
there was a glum asteroid impact flick the very same year, Deep Impact. a light tone action vibe was the way to go

[Anonymous No.14670158]

>>14670132
it's the wordfilter for the abbreviated slang of 'family' which happens to also be the abbreviation of For All Mankind

[Anonymous No.14670163]

>>14670130
>you're an absolute retard for handwaving it as sarcasm
Even if you take it literally he's saying its' better. You're getting upset over a single word, "slightly". One word on a random Instagram page, remind yourself how pathetic that is. Let's see what else the author said on reddit:
"My photo on the left is about the best I can do from my driveway in suburbia with my 6" telescope. This was captured over 3 nights in November 2020 from bortle 6 light pollution. Even though the quintet is just a tiny part of the image, it blows my mind knowing there are even more distant galaxies seen in JWST's full res image. I'm looking forward to seeing what this amazing telescope will show us about the universe in the coming years...Please note that the JWST photo has been downsampled a bit, and mine upsampled to make them the same size in this photo."
Yeah, it definitely sounds like he's claiming they're the same.
>few of them were real astronomers yet almost all of them would cite how amateur astronomers are important to science
Why don't you cite a few examples.

[Anonymous No.14670164]

>>14670158
Not him but SENPAI don't pass the world filter?

[Anonymous No.14670171]

>>14670164
Look like I've got my answer.
I wonder what's the reason behind that wordfilter. Some kind of meme that went front I guess

[Anonymous No.14670172]

>>14670153
I like Deep Impact, I rewatched it this year for the first time since I was a kid.

[Anonymous No.14670174]

>>14670171
it's funny and a nice way to subvert slang which isn't sufficiently weeby, just like t b h and desu

[Anonymous No.14670186]

>>14670174
Meh, I would prefer they don't subvert any damn acronym, especially when it come handy.

[Anonymous No.14670195]

>>14670171
it's been here for years, since around hiroshima nagasaki demooted moot

[Anonymous No.14670205]

>>14670195
>hiroshima nagasaki
...I'll bite, that's another word filter?

[Anonymous No.14670215]

>>14670205
i forgot what the guy's name was, i remember it was a meme to call him that

hiroyuki nishimura, i just googled it

[Anonymous No.14670221]

>>14670163
I'm not upset at all, I pointed out the fact that amateur astronomers overstate their contribution when most of them they're really just doing astrophotography for fun, this ironically upset you enough to get into a long drawn out and pointless argument in defense of your hobby that no one gives a shit about. Even trying to shove your telescope up your ass again would be a better use of your time.
>prove it
This shows you have no intention of having a good faith discussion because you know full well that thousands of amateur astronomers came out against Starlink. If I posted some examples, you would then go "so what that's just a few people" or try to downplay what they said, as you did with the other guy.

[Anonymous No.14670223]

what a stupid and reckless idea

[Anonymous No.14670240]

>>14670186
nah the usage of f a m became incredibly obnoxious, especially with the influx of newfags in 2016 who would use it in every damn post. wordfilters are often a good way of stamping out cancer

[Anonymous No.14670250]

>>14670240
I can't wait "newfag" to be replaced by "veteran" just to screw with those who support this stupid wordfilter.
Oh and replace "fakenews" by "social truth" while we are at it.

[Anonymous No.14670260]

>>14670250
obvious newfag

[Anonymous No.14670268]

>>14669958
>Why aren't you giving me methalox in my combustion chamber?

[Anonymous No.14670272]

i hate astronomy and I hate the jwst, it's lame as fuck to build little technological marvels to see some cuckshit.

[Anonymous No.14670278]

>>14670272
Based.

[Anonymous No.14670286]

>>14670221
>I pointed out the fact that amateur astronomers overstate their contribution
A fact you can't seem to cite. The previous "citation" didn't mention his contribution or science once.
>This shows you have no intention of having a good faith
>Can't ask for sources man, that's bad faith.
Lel. How predicable, of course you just made it up.

[Anonymous No.14670287]

>>14668842
if they really want the initial cast to stay, they'll do it, justifying it based on how the universe has decades ahead supertech compared to ours

[Anonymous No.14670306]

The SSME is a miracle of modern technology and it’s a shame that SLS throws them away. When Lockheed built a Full Flow Staged Combustion engine called the “Integrated Powerhead Demonstrator,” they were still only just able to match the isp of the SSME

[Anonymous No.14670310]

>>14669344
>>14669370
>>14669438
this isn't for all mankind you triple nigger

[Anonymous No.14670311]

>>14670306
they probably just used an underexpanded nozzle because there's no point in building a bigger one for a tech demo

[Anonymous No.14670333]

>>14670286
>Can't ask for sources man, that's bad faith.
Sources you know exist and you can find with a two second google search? Yes, it's bad faith. You can pick from thousands of examples, like this "astronomer" and his group who made a documentary about it.
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/starlink-uk-elon-musk-spacex-4086107
>you can't give me a paper on the attitudes of astronomers compared to their contributions thus i win
I can't cite a source that you're a faggot but it's also true and a perfectly reasonable claim that doesn't require evidence.

[Anonymous No.14670334]

I need a serious answer to why we can't compact the world's garbage and send it into a distant earth orbit

[Anonymous No.14670336]

>>14670334
the compactor broke

[Anonymous No.14670358]

>>14670334
It can be done it just shouldn't be done. Same answer as for why your mother had you.

[Anonymous No.14670363]

>>14670333
>documentary
Actually a short film which you can see here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlqZyJZjFc0

[Anonymous No.14670369]

>>14670334
because we could just dig a really deep pit and just throw shit in.

[Anonymous No.14670374]

>>14670334
We have several perfectly good oceans for that anon

[Anonymous No.14670375]

>>14670334
the trash from today could be the energy source for tomorrow, also you need to do and spent a lot of work and energy.

[Anonymous No.14670412]

stage it

[Anonymous No.14670415]

>>14670153
I actually never saw the ending to that, I was in the theater watching it and the projector died 20 minutes in

They let us watch the Truman Show for free so I wasn't bothered

[Anonymous No.14670418]

>>14670223
Thankfully the signal will be very degraded by the time it gets anywhere of note. Similarly I hope the voyager probes get smashed into a million pieces within the next few million years.

[Anonymous No.14670421]

>>14670334
It’s still too expensive to send urfers to LEO

[Anonymous No.14670423]

>>14670418
if aliens get close enough to see one of the voyager plates they'll get way more info on earth from our broadcasts

[Anonymous No.14670427]

>>14670415
They nuke the asteroid but it breaks in half, the larger half misses but the smaller one impacts. That scene is pretty cool, also sad with the dad and his daughter on the beach for their final moments. I always wondered how quick of a death that would've been, that wave had to be going hundreds of miles an hour.

[Anonymous No.14670432]

>>14670174
The irony of course being that weeaboo was a word filter for wapanese.

[Anonymous No.14670438]

>>14670437
>>14670437
>>14670437
New thread

[Anonymous No.14670468]

>>14670333
>https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/starlink-uk-elon-musk-spacex-4086107
Oh look, another source which doesn't mention science or the contributions of amateurs. No I'm not going to waste my time watching a documentary. I'm sure you can find 50 trillion random search results about amateurs and Starlink, but that's not the specific claim you made. Since you're apparently struggling to remember your point I will remind you:
>few of them were real astronomers yet almost all of them would cite how amateur astronomers are important to science
>you can't give me a paper on the attitudes of astronomers compared to their contributions thus i win
You specifically cited the feelings of amateur astronomers for the basis of your claim, but then when asked to prove this you just shrugged. Don't invent "facts" to back up your argument. That's bad faith.

[Anonymous No.14670490]

>>14670223
Why reckless?

[Anonymous No.14670542]

>>14670468
>I'm not going to waste time watching a source that I specifically asked for because it would prove me wrong

Okay, retard. There are two claims you are upset with, one was about the attitude of astronomers, the other was that they are upset with Starlink, the link proves you wrong on both accounts but out of the interest of fairness I've separated the two claims because I knew you would stick to the first one and claim the evidence wasn't sufficient because it doesn't apply to all astronomers. What you're asking is impossible, you know this, but you still insist because you have no other argument and you're seething that I made fun of your hobby. Kill yourself, you've only made astrophotographers look worse.

[Anonymous No.14670568]

>>14669738
You mad bro?

[Anonymous No.14670634]

>>14670604
Your previous posts are visible, you idiot. You implied I made up the part about starlink.

[Anonymous No.14670652]

>>14670634
Nope. But go ahead and cite it, unless this is also impossible.

[Anonymous No.14670663]

>>14670652
>This shows you have no intention of having a good faith discussion because you know full well that thousands of amateur astronomers came out against Starlink.
>Can't ask for sources man, that's bad faith.
>Lel. How predicable, of course you just made it up.
Are you done now or do you want to keep throwing a tantrum?

[Anonymous No.14670681]

>>14670334
Because it might come back around some day and we'll have to build another big ball of garbage to deflect it

[Anonymous No.14670698]

Nice little thread on how the arguments against mars suck
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1548465323770200065.html

[Anonymous No.14670820]

>>14670698
b-b-but
>muh trillorinos of dollarinos!!!1!

[Anonymous No.14670832]

>>14670663
Funny because if you look at my actual post, the bit about starlink isn't there. Lel. I never disputed this claim. This is desperate, even for you.

[Anonymous No.14670846]

>>14670663
Funny because if you look at my actual post, the bit about starlink isn't there. I didn't cite the bit about starlink because it was another obvious attempt by you to move the goalposts.

[Anonymous No.14670882]

>>14670846
No it was a concrete example of how many amateur astrophotographers overstate their importance to science when their activities are disrupted by satellites, which you then refused to acknowledge. You had every option to not drag this shit into the new thread but you're desperate cunt so you did it anyway. You keep grasping at straws in hopes that you can undo making a fool out of yourself, in a vain attempt to stop someone from making fun of hobby which ironically just made it look worse.

This is the last reply you'll get from me, go kill yourself.