/sfg/ - Space Flight General

[Anonymous No.14787622]

WE ARE GOING EDITION

Previous >>14783594

[Anonymous No.14787626]

>>14787622
Beautiful girl

[Anonymous No.14787629]

Despite it's flaws, I came to appreciate Lanzadera De Mierda.

[Anonymous No.14787630]

We are 4 days away from SLS taking off, and Starship is still not legally allowed to launch
let that sink in

[Anonymous No.14787631]

>>14787622
>that conical interstage weighs five fucking tons

that's a lot of wasted mass

[Anonymous No.14787640]

>>14787631
Should've used the rockomax brand adapter

[Anonymous No.14787647]

>>14787622
Glass the earth, demigod war eventually

[Anonymous No.14787649]

>>14787623
I don't know about scrapping with GD. The Atlas IIA/S did some decent work in the 90s, but it wasn't ever serious competition for Arianespace at their peak and I don't think it was even flying at the time of the Brazil deal. If I had to guess I'd say that Arianespace was just really confident that the Ariane 5 would be flying by 1995 as scheduled and they wanted to get some extra francs out of the soon to be obsolete A4 hardware.

[Anonymous No.14787655]

Is skylon real or no

Is it actually being developed?

[Anonymous No.14787656]

>>14787631
>Drop it
>Spend 5 tons on paint
What color, /sfg/?

[Anonymous No.14787657]

>>14787622
>WE ARE GOING
lmao more like
>WE GAAN

[Anonymous No.14787667]

>>14787655
I've seen it down at several .pptx files. They were building the slide master. They have all the transitions, already chosen, ready to be added to the slides.

[Anonymous No.14787672]

>>14787655
>Is it actually being developed?
In a sense.

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/farnborough-2022-uk-reveals-concept-v-hypersonic-aircraft

>The United Kingdom has revealed a new concept for a hypersonic military aircraft, dubbed Concept V.

>Revealed at the Farnborough Airshow on 18 July, Concept V is part of the wider Hypersonic Air Vehicle Experimental (HVX) programme being run by the Royal Air Force's Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO), the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl), and the UK's National Security Strategic Investment Fund (NSSIF), as well as industry partners Reaction Engines and Rolls-Royce.

>“The [HVX] programme is undertaking design work on experimental hypersonic vehicle concepts. At the Farnborough International Airshow, a single-engine hypersonic concept vehicle – ‘Concept V' – has been unveiled. This example vehicle is one of a number of concept designs in active development by the programme,” Reaction Engines said.

[Anonymous No.14787674]

We saw the accidental partial-duration engine test.
We saw the full-duration engine test.
We saw the SRB test fire
We saw 108 Orion analogs dunked into pools while people pretended it mattered.
Finally, after all this time, WE ARE GOING
TO WATCH IT BLOW UP

[Anonymous No.14787687]

>>14787649
I found this article from '89.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/07/17/us-to-bar-indias-buying-missile-device/c249de88-5e32-44ed-ae35-dbad5c122dfd/

>...chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Thursday at a hearing that he understood the French had made the offer as "a sweetener" to win the contract away from "the American company." That company was later identifed as General Dynamics.

Sounds like there was a lot of wheeling and dealing while they were trying to court Brazil. Complete tech transfer for engines, even obsolete ones, is a big deal. They must have been very confident in their development at the time to make such an offer. It's a shame that Ariane squandered their advantage in the civilian launch market. Pork is the mindkiller.

[Anonymous No.14787690]

>>14787622
>>14787669
Hmm. I guess it would require a cubic kilometer, no? Good thing starship has that.

[Anonymous No.14787693]

>>14787655
The guys behind this are somehow the best and yet simultaneously worst scam artists in all of spaceflight.

[Anonymous No.14787700]

>>14787693
>As noted by Reaction Engines in its announcement, the HVX programme “has been established to rapidly develop critical high-Mach/hypersonic technologies, including novel airbreathing propulsion architectures, innovative thermal management systems, and advanced vehicle concepts. A full-scale experimental engine test campaign has now commenced”.

[Anonymous No.14787706]

>>14787700
It's been almost 30 years at this point. Sure, there are bigger grifts, but given that I've seen how many people these dudes employ they are absolutely filthy rich.

[Anonymous No.14787707]

>>14787706
Do you know who Rolls Royce are?

[Anonymous No.14787711]

>>14787707
I am talking about Skylon, fella. You can find recruiting videos for company and tours of their "factory" on YouTube

[Anonymous No.14787716]

>>14787711
I am talking about the SABRE engine. The thing that will power skylon and the thing that needs developed to make it all work.

Rolls Royce are big BIG players in the aircraft engine industry. Made the engine in the spitfire way back in the day.

[Anonymous No.14787726]

What would the spaceflight applications be for a black hole generator?

[Anonymous No.14787738]

>>14787647
I will be under the lunar crust with you, creating an unaligned superintelligence and enjoying refreshments served by asian robot maids
earthers will learn to fear god

[Anonymous No.14787745]

>>14787707
>>14787716
Rolls Royce is nearly bankrupt after posting a 4.6 billion pound lost last year, their stake in Reaction Engines is only 20 million pounds, and you think they have money to bring SABRE to fruition. lol, lmao

[Anonymous No.14787748]

>>14787745
Funny what Ivan threatening to nuke a few times does to ones defence industry.

[Anonymous No.14787752]

>>14787655
Bloody souftech
SKYLON BELONGS TO THE NORF!

[Anonymous No.14787838]

>>14787726
>hit planck energies
uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[Anonymous No.14787933]

>>14787928

[Anonymous No.14787937]

>what my dick looks like after a long day of beating it

[Anonymous No.14787942]

>>14787745
Last year was profitable.

[Anonymous No.14788010]

>bought 450 new stamps from previous company
>didn't know they were not random assortments by lot, but are actually the same lot every order
>I now have 450 copies of stamps I had before
fuck

[Anonymous No.14788022]

>>14787726
>If we could only get this magical physics-defying sci-fi machine to work, we can do magical physics-defying sci-fi things!
This is like inserting infinity into a mathematical equation. Yes, the result is now also infinity. Good job.

[Anonymous No.14788029]

>>14787726
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_starship

[Anonymous No.14788036]

>>14788029
>Black holes seem to have a sweet spot in terms of size, power and lifespan which is almost ideal.
>A black hole weighing 606,000 metric tons (6.06 × 108 kg) would have a Schwarzschild radius of 0.9 attometers (0.9 × 10–18 m, or 9 × 10–19 m), a power output of 160 petawatts (160 × 1015 W, or 1.6 × 1017 W), and a 3.5-year lifespan.
>With such a power output, the black hole could accelerate to 10% the speed of light in 20 days
So six thousand Starship launches to make a black hole ship.

[Anonymous No.14788055]

>>14788029
>>14788036
Do you really think that if you just cram together 606,000 metric tons of rocket debris, it'll suddenly collapse itself into a black hole?

Are you REALLY that stupid??

[Anonymous No.14788072]

>>14788055
Sure :)

[Anonymous No.14788079]

>>14788010
oof size: large

[Anonymous No.14788080]

>>14787726
Any black hole under several hundred metric tons is a bomb. Even if you could cram a whole planck energy (22 micrograms' worth) into a black hole, it would come right back out as a flash of gamma rays equivalent to half a ton of TNT. If you have a nuclear isomer laser putting out that kind of energy per shot in the first place, there's no use converting it into a shitty omidirectional flash of gamma rays unless you wanted to build some kind of Star Trek long distance imager that also gives people cancer or something.

[Anonymous No.14788084]

>>14788080
It's just like smoothbrains who learned about how heavy a teaspoon of material from the core of a neutron star is from a youtube video, and then wondered why we aren't putting it in jars to sell.

[Anonymous No.14788087]

>>14788084
Okay, but why aren't we?

[Anonymous No.14788090]

On average, Mercury is the closest planet to all the other planets

[Anonymous No.14788096]

Someone found the starship lunar lander prototype on a janky ass google earth satellite image. It seems to be much more extensive than what was previously shown in presentations, with a good portion of the hull around the door built up. Looking at it relative to the car beside it, the diameter is exactly 9 meters. The airlock prototype we’ve seen could actually be in the correct location relative to the elevator/ door instead of in a separate area like we previously assumed. The elevator also looks to be able to completely fold into the structure. Also fox damn it’s way bigger than necessary, like you could fit that nearby car in there no problem

[Anonymous No.14788099]

>>14788096
>It's way bigger than necessary
That's the MO of the entire HLS

[Anonymous No.14788100]

>>14788096
Pic rel is this same prototype in that NASA presentation

[Anonymous No.14788102]

>>14787655
The engines are half real, the rest is not.

[Anonymous No.14788107]

>>14788096
This is like one of those stroke simulator images.

[Anonymous No.14788108]

>>14788096
-_- my autocorrect now changes “god” to “fox” automatically… if there ever was a sign that I need to lay off ironically looking at pictures of Krystal it’s this

[Anonymous No.14788113]

>>14788090
this is obviously always going to be the planet closest to the barycenter

[Anonymous No.14788116]

>>14788090
>>14788113

vulcanoids are closer

[Anonymous No.14788131]

>>14787942
>they made a whole 10 million bro
Ah then it's a perfectly healthy company despite the negative FCF and net debt of five billion.

[Anonymous No.14788133]

>>14788108
Nothing wrong with foxes.

[Anonymous No.14788190]

>>14788096
I love how even average joe like me now has access to 3D mapping spy satellites
and it's free of charge

[Anonymous No.14788230]

>>14788108
yes, you need to start doing it unironically. praise be to our new god

[Anonymous No.14788235]

>>14788190
the 3D mapping is done by airplanes, but yes it's neat

[Anonymous No.14788239]

>>14788096
Where is it? Tankwatchers have to do a flyover.

[Anonymous No.14788243]

>>14788239
hawthorne i suppose

[Anonymous No.14788254]

>>14788239
33.921864, -118.326129

[Anonymous No.14788260]

>>14787655
BAE weapons brought the engine tech so it's going to be on classified hypersonic missiles for 30+ years before we get to see them.

[Anonymous No.14788282]

>>14788190
Can 3D mapping these days pick out objects the size of a car?

[Anonymous No.14788288]

>>14788282
Yes

[Anonymous No.14788312]

>>14788282
depends on how low you fly

[Anonymous No.14788320]

>>14788312
and the size of the car in question

[Anonymous No.14788323]

>>14788288
>Even the window sills and ledges
That's pretty nuts

[Anonymous No.14788328]

>>14788323
can't really tell from that pic wether they're 3D

[Anonymous No.14788335]

>>14788254

[Anonymous No.14788338]

>>14787726
Pure chaos

[Anonymous No.14788370]

Nobody responded, I'm out of the loop. People are saying SpaceX can launch any day now but last time I remember they weren't given the go-ahead by FAA. Did that change?

.t transitioning to infrequent lurker status

[Anonymous No.14788373]

>>14788370
>People are saying
people were saying spacex was about to launch in august 2021

[Anonymous No.14788374]

Berger getting some heat

[Anonymous No.14788381]

>>14788373
They could've were it not for the government being slow.

[Anonymous No.14788391]

>>14788370
>People are saying SpaceX can launch any day now
They are people that fell for Musk time aspirations. You can't trust him to make accurate announcements on future projects.

[Anonymous No.14788394]

>>14788374
Reminder that SLS was supposed to be oringially flying even before Falcon Heavy, now it's almost on time with Starship

[Anonymous No.14788404]

>>14788381
Government has always been a factor despite Musk's delusions. Speculating about a possible launch without considering the FAA is retarded.

[Anonymous No.14788428]

>>14788374
ok BOOMer

[Anonymous No.14788492]

>>14787622
Literally nothing about the SLS looks cool, and I'm sick of faggots pretending it does.

[Anonymous No.14788496]

>>14787655
Not even close, no.

[Anonymous No.14788507]

>>14787716
>the SABRE engine. The thing that will power skylon and the thing that needs developed to make it all work.
Even if SABRE worked flawlessly and could operate for 20,000 hours between maintenance teardowns, building Skylon would still ne nearly impossible, because of the number of materials science and structural engineering advancements and breakthroughs that would be needed. If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times, FUCK SSTO

[Anonymous No.14788509]

>>14787726
Good for immediately irradiating yourself with ultra high energy hawking radiation and dying

[Anonymous No.14788514]

>>14787933
sweetie this is a spaceflight thread

[Anonymous No.14788520]

>>14788087
too heavy

[Anonymous No.14788523]

>>14788096
>you could fit that nearby car in there no problem
Future proofing your enormous Moon lander's elevator to be able to transport large pieces of cargo to the Lunar surface including items like pressurized rovers and cabin modules and large ROSAs and battery banks is probably a good idea

[Anonymous No.14788531]

>>14788374
>slosh
They solved that with header tanks
Not that I would expect a fucking retard to know that

[Anonymous No.14788534]

The SLS is gonna BREAK!

[Anonymous No.14788544]

>>14788394
SLS was originally mean to launch in december 2016. TWENTY SIX-TEEN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO9ctKn_Mdc&ab_channel=Chands3rdLeg

[Anonymous No.14788574]

New Arstechnica dropped
https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/08/former-nasa-official-on-trying-to-stop-sls-there-was-just-such-visible-hostility/

Ars: So how did we end up in this situation, in which NASA is modernizing the shuttle and flying most of the Moon mission on a single rocket like NASA did during the Apollo program?

Garver: There's a lot of people in the space community that believe you have to do things this way to get the political support. And in many ways that has borne out. I have said many times, (former NASA Administrator) Mike Griffin was very honest and open about the development of Constellation. It was to retain these jobs. It was to do this, in these contracts, where you could get funding. I can see why engineers think that's the way to work the system. But I think it's backwards politically. These are public funds. What we build should align with the national interest, not just a couple of people who will get us near-term funding.

Ars: A decade or so after all of this, how are you feeling about the future of US spaceflight?

Garver: I'm really positive about the future of space. The last decade has exceeded my expectations largely because of SpaceX. I just want to be clear about that. I couldn't have imagined, as I said in the book, that we would have something like a Starship as far along in the testing as it is today. I really hoped they could get Falcon Heavy before SLS, because that had been announced, and they were starting to work on it. And it was all their own money.

[Anonymous No.14788588]

>>14788087
couldn’t find the lid for the jar, plus the market for exotic matter is not good right now

[Anonymous No.14788613]

>>14788087
pretty sure neutron matter would ignore the jar (and the table, floor, ground, etc.)

[Anonymous No.14788624]

>>14788574
our soccer mom

[Anonymous No.14788639]

wen stack

[Anonymous No.14788646]

>>14788639
August (2021)

[Anonymous No.14788657]

>>14788394
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-affirms-plan-for-first-mission-of-sls-orion
2019 is right around the corner still!

[Anonymous No.14788662]

9 engine booster static fire today followed by 6 engine ship static fire.

[Anonymous No.14788668]

>>14788096
I wonder if the tankwatchers will at some point have the funds to purchase Maxar / ICEYE / Whatever satellite imagery.

[Anonymous No.14788687]

>>14788507
While I agree SSTO is shit the X-15 / shuttle have already done all the R&D needed for LEO re-entry if we had SABRE to get it up there.
The only practical use I can see for SSTO is if we get high thrust / high ISP working together somehow, only then could you get maybe 10% payload mass fraction to make SSTO useful.

[Anonymous No.14788695]

>>14788370
SpaceX won't launch Starship until it passes all tests, and that has yet to happen.

[Anonymous No.14788701]

>>14788662
source?

[Anonymous No.14788713]

>>14788687
Shuttle and X-15 TPS were both too heavy for Skylon to function. Skylon needs a magical metallic panel TPS that's both lighter than Shuttle tiles and more durable.
SABRE itself has high Isp when operating in atmospheric breathing mode, but 1/5th of the way to orbital velocity it needs to switch to rocket mode, which will have a lower Isp than the RS-25 for example, and with a lower thrust to weight ratio at that.

[Anonymous No.14788717]

>>14788713
Who the hell thought that this was a good idea

[Anonymous No.14788736]

>>14788717
The skyon "team"

[Anonymous No.14788748]

I'm throwing $1,000 into this company. It's the only small fusion drive project that is actually sitting in a lab being worked on.

[Anonymous No.14788753]

>>14788514
cocksuck fucker bitch you shatap

[Anonymous No.14788770]

This is now a LUVOIR thread

[Anonymous No.14788774]

>>14788770
infrared telescopes are cringe. rather build a big ass optical to get maximum resolution for looking at close exoplanets.

[Anonymous No.14788787]

>>14788770
for the sake of the indominable human spirit within I BEG that they add a micrometeorite shield

[Anonymous No.14788788]

>>14788748
Looked sketch but I think they are legit, considering thet have Princeton faculty in the company and a bunch of MIT/Princeton engineers

[Anonymous No.14788792]

>>14788770
Why not just buld like 10 more JWSTs now that they know the design works, why immediately jump right back into a mire just as they've managed to pull themselves out of one?

[Anonymous No.14788793]

>>14788787
why? if it's not an issue

[Anonymous No.14788797]

>>14788788
I've been reading about the founding team, they actually are legit. It's not a bunch of 30 year old tech fags. They've somehow been floating the company for 20 years. They only need a few million to complete their next prototype which will prove its fusion capabilities.

[Anonymous No.14788801]

>>14787656
Watermelon colored stripes

[Anonymous No.14788806]

>>14788793
>why? if it's not an issue
Because it will certainly be an issue.
They already had a significant debris strike on the primary mirror of JWST, which is both smaller than luvoir and operating in a wavelength range less sensitive to reflector flaws. Going to a larger mirror and smaller wavelength dramatically increases the rate of overall degradation of an unprotected mirror, because you get more impacts and each impact does more damage to the operational quality of the telescope than the same impact would have on an infrared telescope.

[Anonymous No.14788810]

>>14788797
Sounds like grift to me, honestly

[Anonymous No.14788835]

>>14788810
The pitch is impressive
https://www.spacedventures.com/prelaunch/princeton-satellite-systems-pre-launch/pitch#highlights-section-component

[Anonymous No.14788850]

>>14788613
outside the gigagravity of a neutron star it just explodes

[Anonymous No.14788853]

Since it does not seem like the Artemis timeline will not allow a permanent lunar habitat until the 2030s or 2040s in the worst case scenario, would the pencil pushers in the senate and at NASA allow the commercial sector to begin building a lunar base?

[Anonymous No.14788860]

>>14788853
>would the pencil pushers in the senate and at NASA allow the commercial sector
>allow
Dissolve the senate and vest power directly in the hands of the commercial sector for colony-building. NASA can just be JPL and keep doing probes.

[Anonymous No.14788879]

>>14788850
On the energy scale of the strong force, it actually just gently sublimates to a nucleon gas cloud, which puffs apart as the free neutrons begin to decay and reheat the gas.
On the energy scale of molecular bonds, it's an explosion much more energetic than a fusion explosion, with an unimaginably high peak power output.
Why is the strong force such a chad?

[Anonymous No.14788892]

>>14788853
>Since it does not seem like the Artemis timeline will not allow a permanent lunar habitat until the 2030s or 2040s in the worst case scenario
Struggling to understand this series of negatives.
Anyway, there's nothing legally preventing any private entity from building an operating anything ranging from a small lander probe up to a huge industrially capable settlement on the Moon, as long as those activities do not disturb other owned objects on the Moon such as other probes and so forth. No property can legally be claimed to be owned by any government at this time, however it's likely that you would not be able to greatly disturb the Apollo landing sites without some kind of major repercussion due to destroying a heritage site or something.

[Anonymous No.14788895]

>>14787656
Itasha paintjob, what else?

[Anonymous No.14788914]

Why hasn't Germany signed the Artemis Accords?

[Anonymous No.14788932]

>>14788914
Conspiratorial reasons

[Anonymous No.14788950]

>>14788914
To claim new Lunar settlements

[Anonymous No.14788958]

>>14788914
Germany isn't a real country and hasn't been for 70 years.

[Anonymous No.14788962]

>>14788958
this. nothing ever happens here any more. tesla is unironically the biggest construction project in the country

[Anonymous No.14788967]

>>14787626
i want my penis inside a man's vagine

[Anonymous No.14788978]

>>14788914
the only reason to sign on to the Artemis Accords is to cross your fingers that America will send one of your astronauts to the moon. Longtime partners like Japan and Canada will almost certainly be first, followed by France and maybe South Korea. After that, sure, maybe a Brazilian will walk on the moon. Maybe.

[Anonymous No.14788982]

>>14788810
>>14788835
lol why is it a grift.

[Anonymous No.14788984]

>>14788978
I will be the first /sfg/ moonwalker

[Anonymous No.14789009]

>>14788914
This map fucked up. French Guyana is part of France and so should be green.

[Anonymous No.14789050]

it's over

[Anonymous No.14789056]

>>14789009
shut it colonizer. guinea belongs to the black man

[Anonymous No.14789058]

>>14789056
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.14789061]

>>14789050
What are you seeing?

[Anonymous No.14789067]

>>14789050
What happened? Tankwatchers are saying something about a collision

[Anonymous No.14789072]

>>14789009
French Guiana is green though. Suriname and Guyana are not.

[Anonymous No.14789085]

>>14789050
oh did rodrigo forget to take down the scaffolding?

[Anonymous No.14789087]

>>14789067
>>14789050
looks like the scaffolding collapsed for some reason

[Anonymous No.14789099]

>>14788914

Obviously they will join the Russian-Indian-Chinese Coalition.

[Anonymous No.14789105]

>>14788914

Why is Ukraine in it even to begin with? This is like having a Coalition of the Willing with US-occupied Afghanistan joining the Invasion of Iraq.

[Anonymous No.14789107]

>>14788982
I assign zero credibility to any expert in any field. I've learned my lesson having observed all those experts who believed SSTO was the path forward and SpaceX would fail in their ambitions, and of course those experts who still believe SLS is a good rocket to this day.

[Anonymous No.14789112]

>>14789009
it is

[Anonymous No.14789126]

>>14788835
>9 months to Mars
Nope, if they're that misinformed about how long it takes to get to Mars (easily as low as 5 months with chemical propulsion), then who knows where else they're misrepresenting their facts?

[Anonymous No.14789140]

>>14789107
Dude you realize youre talking about government workers? you realize that NASA is a fucking jobs program? They are not profit driven therefore they have to justify dumb shit.

Don't paint with large brushes, I know you think you sound smart and le skeptical but you have to look deeper. Not everyone is full of shit. Investing in early stage ventures is risky but it beats the hell out of some shitcoin or meager stock returns. I look it at it this way - I either lose $1,000 or I fund fusion drives at the seed stage and make 1000x return over 10 years.

[Anonymous No.14789213]

>>14789105
Ukraine was a US space partner even before the war.

[Anonymous No.14789214]

>>14788713
>lower isp than RS-25
You mean like every other chemical rocket engine that has or will exist on an orbital vehicle? The lack of needing to carry oxidizer for half the energy is the reason this thing was cool and basically makes up for any other shortcomings. Too bad it'll never be real, I'll settle for Starship.

[Anonymous No.14789216]

>>14789107
>this radical new startup using new technology succeeded where established companies failed
>so this other radical new startup using technology is probably going to fail

what's it like being retarded?

[Anonymous No.14789217]

New space launch startup dropped

https://twitter.com/stoke_space/status/1562193444487188481?s=21&t=PDUkTqmo8pcwcjCUO118WQ

Any others startups that are making reusable rockets? I know relativity is one, rocket lab isn’t really a startup anymore at this point.

[Anonymous No.14789223]

Did anyone order a scaffolding-rich combustion?

[Anonymous No.14789229]

>>14789214
Skylon was a pure hydrolox design. If it can't match the RS-25 for TWR in rocket mode it wasn't going to work at all.

[Anonymous No.14789238]

>>14789223
Lol they plowed into the scaffolding with the chopsticks?

[Anonymous No.14789245]

>>14789223
unironically embarrassing

[Anonymous No.14789246]

>>14789223
Alright who left scaffolding on the chopsticks
fess up Manuel c'mon now

[Anonymous No.14789247]

>>14788835
Their proposed system used D-He3 fusion and would achieve 5 to 10 newtons of thrust per megawatt of power, at an Isp of between 8000 and 20,000 seconds.

Problems:
Fuel choice: D-He3 fusion is much harder to achieve than D-D fusion which itself is much harder to achieve than D-T fusion, which we currently cannot accomplish in a device which breaks even. To put it in technological terms, this is like proposing Raptor in the 1940's when people were still struggling to figure out diluted alcohol fueled gas generator rockets powered by H2O2 decomposition gasses. It skips several levels of technological difficulty, and furthermore, any proposal that uses D-He-3 reeks of buzzword talk since going to a D-D fusion fuel would result in a significant INCREASE in fusion power, not a decrease. We're talking orders of magnitude more power here, because of how favorable a D-D reaction is under conditions which make D-He3 fusion even possible.
Also He-3 is currently very pricey, while deuterium is comparably very cheap and abundant. Our only large source of He-3 is decay of tritium, which is only produced by bombarding lithium or deuterium with neutrons. Mining the moon for He-3 will happen never and mining the ice giants for He-3 requires that we have preexisting fusion thrusters anyway.
Isp: We have ion propulsion more efficient than that.
Thrust: 5 to 10 N per MW means that for any time savings on transfers between planets we will need monstrously powerful fusion engines (per unit mass), and those things bettwen be extremely efficient at converting fusion power to thrust because otherwise the radiators are going to dump a bunch of mass back into the system and make fusion a slowboat technology just like electric thrusters (though not quite as slow).
Basically I see a lot of overpromising in here, and I barely even poked at the economics of the whole thing either.

[Anonymous No.14789249]

>>14789217
I'm in VC. there are a ton. Andy at Stoke is the real deal though. I also like Reaction Dynamics

[Anonymous No.14789251]

>>14789140
>Not everyone is full of shit.
source?

[Anonymous No.14789256]

>>14789249
>I'm in VC

[Anonymous No.14789265]

>>14789247
they already have a working prototype and are able to build these things with off the shelf parts and magnets for a couple million which is insanely cheap. I know the Navy is interested specifically in their design so they can outfit submarines with these. Also, truly remote power sources are highly interesting to the military.

These are modular too.

[Anonymous No.14789272]

>>14789265
I am deeply skeptical that you can achieve controlled fusion with COTS equipment and a lot budget. The amount of energy and precision you need to contain a fusion reaction enough to even start it is insane.

With this being said, I'd love to be proven wrong.

[Anonymous No.14789273]

>>14789223
They should have kept pulling.
Snap the cable, have the chopsticks plummet down, smash the OLM out of whack and in the process deform the tower enough so that it needs to be demolished.

[Anonymous No.14789279]

>we are going
When?

[Anonymous No.14789282]

>>14789272
I like this as an investment because their next milestone is clearly defined. The next prototype will either generate fusion or it won't. Their design is specifically why they can get away with COTS hardware. I've talked with a few advisors who have grown more bullish on this after mulling over the details.

[Anonymous No.14789283]

>>14789279
The window opens on Mo(o)nday.

[Anonymous No.14789287]

status on starship launch license? they can't still launch?

[Anonymous No.14789288]

>>14789282
What do you think of Zap Energy? I think their design is much more promising as a rocket since it relies on fluid flow instead of magnets for containment.

[Anonymous No.14789290]

>>14789273
The chopsticks should have the power to sheer the entire thing in half no problem, it must have either been stopped because someone noticed, or because they had some kind of force monitoring system in there

[Anonymous No.14789295]

>>14789214
>The lack of needing to carry oxidizer for half the energy
One fifth of the final velocity, and more like 1/8th of the total delta V, which is what actually matters. Even an infinitely efficient engine that used zero propellant to reach mach ~6 before switching to internal propellants in rocket mode would not be good enough to make reusable SSTO practical to achieve. Possible, sure, but practical is what matters.
I mention thrust to mass ratio and Isp as related to the RS-25 because the Space Shuttle had its boosters separate at a similar velocity where Skylon would be switching to rocket mode. Basically, if SABRE were exactly as efficient and had the same TWR as the RS-25 at that point, you could imagine the Skylon vehicle as being a Space Shuttle + ET but mashed into a single vehicle. That means you're coating that ET in thermal tiles plus adding stiffeners to the tanks for rigidity during takeoff and landing, beefing up the landing gear, etc etc.
Now consider that since the SABRE engine in rocket mode is LESS efficient than the RS-25 and weighs MORE, the resulting vehicle you get is going to suffer payload reductions compared to the vehicle I just described. I hope I'm getting my point across with this comparison.

[Anonymous No.14789301]

>>14789216
Nothing they are proposing is radical or new. Their design has been around for decades and they are talking about using helium 3 fusion when we still can't break even with D-T. It's not happening.

[Anonymous No.14789308]

>>14789217
I kinda have no idea what I'm looking at, is that an engine mount with no engine?

[Anonymous No.14789310]

>>14789288
I don't have an opinion, we consult our advisors to dive into the technicals for our investments. I do like Avalanche though.

[Anonymous No.14789312]

>>14789223
That's how you know they're doing real work out there, desu

[Anonymous No.14789314]

>>14789301
>nuclear fusion propulsion isn't a radical technology

Can you actually hear yourself when you talk or is it just like a buzzing sound?

[Anonymous No.14789316]

STARBASE IS BEING BOMBED BY RUSSIA

[Anonymous No.14789319]

>>14789290
Yeah I know the cable isn't gonna snap. However the carriage really isn't designed for being stabbed with the force of a thousand suns. Those arms are only ever supposed to be in tension I think.
Hopefully it's not damaged.

[Anonymous No.14789322]

>>14789316
Fit Zeus with his AA harness and deploy

[Anonymous No.14789334]

>>14789301
Did you even read their pitch or are you just being obtuse on purpose? Here I'll link it for you, retard

https://www.spacedventures.com/prelaunch/princeton-satellite-systems-pre-launch/pitch

[Anonymous No.14789335]

>>14789316
cringe jared. get a grip. you're a literal /k/ larper

[Anonymous No.14789340]

Biden just order F-22 to bombed Starbase, it's fucking over.

[Anonymous No.14789341]

>>14789229
Exactly. If it's hard to imagine an RS-25 powered rocket stage which can separate from its first stage at 2 km/s, achieve orbit with payload, then deorbit, reenter safely, and land, all while being economical, then it must be REALLY hard to imagine a vehicle which can do all that but instead of having a first stage booster it carries extra wing area, a set of heavier and less efficient rocket engines, enough structural mass to be able to lift off of a runway, extra hydrogen tank volume for airbreathing mode, and big precoolers that do nothing to contribute to performance beyond mach 6.
Skylon, and SSTO in general, is a big meme. There's no advantage and there's no way to use air breathing engines to achieve any kind of performance parity with reusable TSTO rockets, even rockets using engines with meh-tier efficiency.
SABRE is kinda neat and would be useful if we ever figure out aerodynamics that eliminate sonic boom effects, thereby making supersonic and hypersonic transport over land potentially feasible, but for rocket launch it's dumb.

[Anonymous No.14789346]

ITT:
Delusional pop-sci loving fusion retards get upset at reality
>>14789247
If it isn't a grift, and they can achieve engineering breakeven in such a small footprint, one questions why they aren't solely focusing on the PFRC as a power source for Earth instead of a DFD spacecraft that realistically would only perform outer planet missions after achieving a technology readiness level they're nowhere near. It's not like the helium-3 supply exists in either case but Earth is a much larger addressable market.
>>14789282
>Investment
You're gambling on meme technology that has a near zero chance of paying off. You may as well set your $1000 on fire or use it to buy a subscription to L2 for that one person here who never shuts up about it.

[Anonymous No.14789355]

>>14789265
>they already have a working prototype
No, at best they have a working experiment that they can use as a test bed to study the plasma dynamics. They do not have a breakeven fusion reactor, which is what their proposal above states they will have. Not just a fusor, or a fusion-boosted electric engine, but an actual self-sustaining fusion power source that also acts as a direct drive fusion rocket. They do not have this and they're not close to it either. If they were they would not be asking for $100,000 and getting $180,000, they would be asking for $100 million and getting $10 billion to start delivering units ASAP, and the US navy would be designing fusion power systems for their warships.

[Anonymous No.14789356]

>>14789346
Anon, building a fusion power plant is way harder in terms of engineering than achieving fusion and just pointing the fusion products in the opposite direction.

We've been successfully using fusion since 1952, it's just that it hasn't been contained fusion for power generation.

[Anonymous No.14789362]

>>14789282
>I like this as an investment because their next milestone is clearly defined
Dude, fucking ARCA has set clearly defined milestones. That's not a reason to invest.

[Anonymous No.14789367]

>>14789356
>DFD provides power as well as propulsion in one integrated device, it would also provide as much as 2 MW of power to the payloads upon arrival, expanding options for instrument selection, laser/optical communications
You were saying?

[Anonymous No.14789374]

>>14789314
Nothing about their approach to fusion is radical or new. Self sustaining fusion devices would obviously be a radical advancement in technology: I'm saying this group will not achieve it.

[Anonymous No.14789377]

>>14787655
Like all post 50's British aerospace projects ,it is an eternal meme.

[Anonymous No.14789378]

>>14789334
Yes, I read the entire thing. They won't succeed in their goal (a device capable of sustaining fusion reactions using its own generated power and acting as a propulsion system for space vehicles).

[Anonymous No.14789379]

>>14789316
>>14789322
>>14789335
>>14789340

[Anonymous No.14789382]

>>14789367
Didn't see that part.

Yeah, that might be a little far off. Granted, on earth, you don't have the luxury of venting radioactive exhaust products off into the the distance instead of containing them.

>>14789374
VTVL reusables were an unrealistic pie in the sky technology until they were fielded.

I'm not saying this is guaranteed or even likely to work, but it's simply irrational to list SpaceX as a reason why they wouldn't.

[Anonymous No.14789389]

>>14789310
>I don't have an opinion, we consult our advisors to dive into the technicals for our investments.

[Anonymous No.14789390]

>>14789346
>If it isn't a grift, and they can achieve engineering breakeven in such a small footprint, one questions why they aren't solely focusing on the PFRC as a power source for Earth
Exactly this.

[Anonymous No.14789392]

>>14789379
oh that's not jared is it

[Anonymous No.14789393]

>>14789379
That's pretty cool.

[Anonymous No.14789396]

>>14789356
Did YOU read the proposal? I hope you're not the same anon who said he's going in for $1000 on this scam.

[Anonymous No.14789398]

>>14789379
where would this have even come from?

[Anonymous No.14789401]

>>14789389
> Yes, let me just spew my ego at you and pretend I have a PhD in fusion like every other fag on /sci/

It's cool though, I'll let you nerd squabble on here while I invest and have a chance to make it

[Anonymous No.14789403]

>>14789379
Goddamn planes are cool

[Anonymous No.14789405]

>>14789382
>VTVL reusables were an unrealistic pie in the sky technology until they were fielded.
Oh fuck off with that. This fusion group is not a SpaceX equivalent, they're Reaction Engines. They're trying to sell you their Skylon.

[Anonymous No.14789407]

fags

[Anonymous No.14789408]

>>14789398
They don't have their transponder on so they'd have to tell us for us to know for sure, but there's an air force base in Brownsville, and a lot of training going on near San Antonio at the moment. The F-22 demo team will be doing a proper full show in a couple of days
https://www.jble.af.mil/About-Us/Units/Langley-AFB/F-22-Demo-Team/

[Anonymous No.14789411]

>>14789396
I think you're just a retard who doesn't understand the difference between an extremely speculative technology startup and a scam.

It's common in rapidly growing fields like biotech, physics, and so on for groups of scientists to start a corporation to investigate a technology, without having any realistic chance of bringing a product to market any time soon.

It works perfectly fine as a business model because any technological breakthrough you do manage to achieve can be patented and sold, and the technological expertise that you're building is something that big corporations will pay for.

You keep saying "grift" and "scam" as if the investors don't know perfectly well that they're far away from a product, and they didn't accept that risk as a normal part of this kind of industry. lrn2finance retard

[Anonymous No.14789412]

>>14789401
>OOOH IM INVOOOOOOSTING
VCs are literally soulless.

[Anonymous No.14789415]

>>14789412
Use that money to buy more funko pops

[Anonymous No.14789417]

I hate the Orange Rogget.

I hate the Orange Rogget

I hate the Orange Rogget.

[Anonymous No.14789418]

>>14789401
>knows nothing about tech and has zero ability to tell real advancement from mere hopes and dreams
>chooses to put money into such ventures without any research
>defends this choice by stating that the other people warning him that he's making a bad investment are nerds
lmao

[Anonymous No.14789419]

Does anyone have that shopped version of the SLS lightning strike image where it's struck directly? I have a meme idea.

[Anonymous No.14789423]

>>14789407
Not even close to achieving breakeven.

[Anonymous No.14789425]

>>14789417
Doctor Strangehate, or, How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Orange Rogget

[Anonymous No.14789428]

>>14789418
you're the kind of person who, if he had the chance to invest in SpaceX, apple, google, etc. early stage, would pass because you can't handle ambiguity or risk.

[Anonymous No.14789429]

>>14789411
You will lose money on that company when the amazing technological advancements they hope to achieve never materialize.

[Anonymous No.14789432]

>>14789392
nah that's military

[Anonymous No.14789434]

>>14789429
It's $1000, who cares.

[Anonymous No.14789439]

All these sour grapes faggots who talk about space won't invest in it. Put your money where your mouth is.

[Anonymous No.14789441]

>>14789429
Maybe. Alternatively, if they develop one patentable technology that gets bought by Lockheed Martin or Raytheon or whatever, that would pay back the investors and then some. If it's a group of Princeton physicists are willing to devote years of their lives to a project, and investors who have looked at the technology are willing to put up venture capital, there's a pretty high chance of that happening.

Especially given that actual big boy investors are funding dozens of these projects at any one time, knowing that they only need one of them to blow up.

Either way, you just sound like an angry sperg who doesn't understand the economics behind emerging technologies. By the way, a thousand dollars is absolutely nothing to anybody who doesn't live on neetbux.

[Anonymous No.14789447]

>>14789439
>5k worth of investments in grifting meme companies, I'm going to make it bro
Are you the same person claiming to be a venture capitalist? I'm literally LOLing, have fun gambling with lunch money.

[Anonymous No.14789449]

>>14789428
Wrong. I've been a true believe in SpaceX since 2010 when I learned they existed. This is because their goals make sense economically and don't require any leaps in technological ability. There's NOTHING fundamentally different between a normal rocket with normal engines and a vertically landing rocket booster except for avionics capability and different design considerations for what engines need to be able to do, etc etc. Building a reusable rocket is like building a plane when planes already exist. Building a fusion rocket out of nowhere is like trying to build a 5th generation fighter jet in the late 1800's when people are still fucking around trying to make heavier than air flight possible.

[Anonymous No.14789451]

>>14789439
>JUST

[Anonymous No.14789455]

>>14789419

[Anonymous No.14789456]

>>14789447
Laugh all you want, I will be gloating here into eternity when any one of these works out.


>>14789449
lmao I love the should've, would've, could've crowd. hindsight is 20/20.

>fusion rocket out of nowhere

They've been working on this for 20 years. This isn't some green horn team.

[Anonymous No.14789457]

>>14789439
I would sincerely like to see what each of these is working on, look at some prototypes or recent/ongoing testing, that would be very interesting and maybe even inspiring to potential investors.

[Anonymous No.14789462]

>>14789457
it's all right here: https://www.spacedventures.com/offers

[Anonymous No.14789463]

>fusion rocket
yeah no

[Anonymous No.14789465]

I'm off for some rishathra

[Anonymous No.14789473]

>>14789455

[Anonymous No.14789475]

So what happens if this thing explodes shortly after lift-off? Would it be enough to kill SLS? It would certainly be embarrassing as fuck, right?

[Anonymous No.14789476]

>>14789441
>Either way, you just sound like an angry sperg who doesn't understand the economics behind emerging technologies
Here's a lesson in economics and tech for you: D-He3 fusion requires temperatures and confinement 100x higher than D-D fusion, which means if I were a competitor to these people and I decided to make my own patent based off their device which used the D-D reaction instead (plus other changes to make it legally distinct), I would have a fusion reactor 100x as powerful as theirs, using a fuel that is thousands of times cheaper and billions of times more abundant.
Imagine a man tells you he wants to sell you a box for $100 dollars which can turn dirt into pure salt, and he tells you how the machine works, and you realize that if what he's saying to you is true, you should be able to take that exact box and with one tweak start turning dirt into pure gold. Would you trust this man enough to pay him $100 dollars for his magic box? Or would you be suspicious that he's trying to sell you a trick wooden box that doesn't actually transmute materials?

[Anonymous No.14789483]

>>14789465
If I were a billionaire, I'd be trying to build a space habitat equivalent to the Falcon 9.

Whoever is the first to field a space habitat that's cheap, modular, and easy to set up will absolutely dominate the space age. You could build hotels, research bases, casinos, mining towns, just endless possibilities.

[Anonymous No.14789493]

>>14789476
Do you think they just chose D-He3 as fuel source? You really think they can just stick D-D in there and call it good?

[Anonymous No.14789495]

>>14789462
https://cosmicshielding.com/
This one mentions a test shield going to ISS this year on the funding page you posted, I'd be interested in seeing how that turns out.

[Anonymous No.14789503]

>>14789456
>lmao I love the should've, would've, could've crowd. hindsight is 20/20.
You and I literally cannot invest in SpaceX retard.
It IS a fusion rocket out of nowhere because breakeven fusion DOESN"T EXIST. They even say as much in their proposal. They figure they won't achieve breakeven until they go all the way from 0.05 tesla magnetic field strength to 5 tesla. Do you know what plasma does with increasing field strength? It gets squirrelly. Wanna know why we have had all those "fusion in 20 years" statements decades and decades ago? It's because back then everyone was new to plasma physics and was drawing straight trend lines between small experiments and future larger experiments, but it turns out that plasma dynamics do not scale like that.
I bet if you draw a straight line from PFRC-2 to PFRC-4 it would predict breakeven fusion and a working engine. I'm telling you that every single approach to fusion reactors in human history has made the same exact error in predicting the performance of their future attempts. It will not work.

[Anonymous No.14789511]

>>14789493
D-D means shitloads of neutrons flooding out, so you need shielding and have to deal with embrittlement etc.

[Anonymous No.14789516]

>>14789476
Google is telling me that D-He3 produces way less neutrons than D-D, which makes energy harvesting way easier.

If your argument is that nobody should ever investigate D-He3 pathways because you said so, I think you're just retarded.

[Anonymous No.14789517]

>>14789503
They need to build PFRC-3 for this reason. Michael has said that modeling only goes so far and that they need to physically build the damn thing to either prove or disprove their design. I am taking a bet on this, I am not sure of course but I'm willing to burn $1,000 for the chance.

[Anonymous No.14789519]

>>14789456
>>14789428
>I will be gloating here into eternity when any one of these works out.
You've already been here for two years bragging about being a "venture capitalist" when you've made nothing from your plainly amateurish efforts and despite all the time you've spent here you still lack a fundamental understanding of spaceflight, particually relating to propulsion.

t. early Tesla investor
>>14789462
They only need 100k to bring this to fruition?! Where do I sign up? I can't wait to be rich

[Anonymous No.14789520]

>>14789503
>you know what plasma does with increasing field strength? It gets squirrelly. Wanna know why we have had all those "fusion in 20 years" statements decades and decades ago? It's because back then everyone was new to plasma physics and was drawing straight trend lines between small experiments and future larger experiments, but it turns out that plasma dynamics do not scale like that.

Yeah I'm excited for this too but have to acknowledge this, even they acknowledge it

Maybe plasma instabilities will be smaller/less extreme to control due to overall compact size of the reactor

[Anonymous No.14789524]

>>14789519
no retard, they need $5m.

[Anonymous No.14789525]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBHIQDUHR9A
big vent

[Anonymous No.14789532]

>>14789455
Thank you, bröther

[Anonymous No.14789535]

>>14789524
>$184,495
>184% of goal reached
Even 5 million is ridiculously low for such a groundbreaking technology. IM A FUTURE BILLIONARE, SUCK MY DICK EVERYONE WHO TOLD ME I WOULD NEVER AMOUNT TO ANYTHING

[Anonymous No.14789538]

>>14789535
$5m is for only PFRC-3. They obviously need much more to get to commercialization. But PFRC-3 unlocks a whole world of military contracts so it's worth the bet.

[Anonymous No.14789550]

TQ-12A engines for the reusable ZQ-2 rocket

[Anonymous No.14789551]

>>14789538
So they're not just set on scamming idiot retail "investors", they're set on scamming the government too. I like their business model, how much of the company will I own if I give them 1k? When will I get paid?

[Anonymous No.14789553]

>>14789550

[Anonymous No.14789554]

>>14789551
(you)

[Anonymous No.14789555]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H93KDxYKeKU

hullo on SLS, its a neutral video just hardware talk

[Anonymous No.14789564]

lol

[Anonymous No.14789566]

>>14789551
scamming the government? Do you understand how government contracting works? jesus christ.

convertible note holders can liquidate upon next funding round.

[Anonymous No.14789569]

>>14789493
I didn't say that, did you miss the part where I mentioned tweaks? It's a basic fact that the stronger coulombic repulsion between Deuterium and He3 requires plasma conditions far more extreme than D-D or D-T fusion. It's also a fact that if you have a device which can hold plasmas confined and hot enough to achieve one fusion reaction, you can use that same device to achieve a much higher rate of reaction in a fuel with less coulombic repulsion.
As a rule of thumb, a breakeven D-He3 fusion reactor would produce about 10x more power when running the D-D reaction and 50x more power when running the D-T reaction. Fusion power is all about overcoming the energy barrier preventing fusion from normally occurring (extreme heat), and containing the energy released from fusion inside the fuel plasma for as long as possible (confinement). Hotter plasmas emit xrays much faster and therefore have a greater rate of heat loss than colder plasmas, on top of the typical increase in heat emission that is inherently coupled to higher temperature things. Not only is the plasma losing heat by glowing extremely brightly, it's losing heat through bremsstrahlung radiation and other mechanisms. If the confinement in your engine is so good that you can break even with a plasma operating at a billion degrees, then you have a fusion torch drive, not a mere fusion rocket.

[Anonymous No.14789577]

>>14789569
D-D and D-T produce a shitload of neutrons though. Nobody wants to deal with a retarded amount of embrittlement in something that's supposed to be a long term reactor.

Also, you don't need to capture enough energy to break even if your primary goal is propulsion. Energy capture is a side quest, energy release is the most important characteristic of the system.

Either way, if you put five million dollars into a research reactor and then somebody buys your patents or your company for more then five million dollars, you've made a profit. This is how experimental startups work in any field.

Keep sperging though.

[Anonymous No.14789588]

>>14789577
It's okay bro let it go. These retards don't understand economics or how markets work. Let them sit on 4chan for eternity.

[Anonymous No.14789593]

>>14789566
>Selling the government a technology that will never pan out is just business bro
If you say so. Ignoring that, what's the actual ownership structure? What are the notes worth in the next funding round? Sounds similar to a Ponzi scheme.

[Anonymous No.14789599]

>>14789569
cont
There is no reason why you would baseline D-He3 as your fusion reaction of choice. D-D would be better in every way. D-He3 isn't even aneutronic, like He3-He3 is, because the D-D reaction is far more favorable. The only way to make D-He3 almost aneutronic is to limit the D-D side reaction probability by flooding the reactor with He3 and only trickling in a little bit of deuterium, so that the likelihood of two deuterium nuclei finding each other is very low. This is alright for a reactor, which typically scrubs its exhaust outputs for fuel and reintroduces those isotopes back into the plasma, but for an open cycle direct drive fusion rocket, such a waste of He3 would be unacceptable.
>>14789511
>>14789516
See above, D-He3 is not aneutronic unless you are flooding your plasma with He3, which means you are dumping most of the most valuable portion of your fuel supply out the back of your direct-drive fusion thruster. In fact the most economical way to run the D-He3 cycle would be to flood with deuterium instead, to use up all your super expensive He-3. Of course, at that point, you're really just running a D-D reactor with some He-3 thrown in which would actually reduce the reaction rate.

[Anonymous No.14789605]

3 engine spin prime

[Anonymous No.14789611]

>>14789577
>>14789588
see >>14789599
D-He3 is not aneutronic. It's not even close to aneutronic.

[Anonymous No.14789614]

[Anonymous No.14789619]

>>14789599
>>14789611
I'm pretty sure a D-He3 reaction with D-D side reactions produces less neutrons than an exclusively D-D reaction.

You're fixated on 100% perfection when that isn't a necessary or realistic goal for any new technology.

Also, I'm pretty sure buying He-3 for 1300 a gram is still affordable if it's a multibillion dollar mission to another planet.

[Anonymous No.14789623]

why don't we have robotic rocket factories or at least predominantly robotic tooling.

All maned space vehicles look like fucking art projects with an army of artisanal "maistros" which come and go and use their actual fucking hands and mk 1 eyeballs to decide actual decisions on the final position of parts. And im not talking about one or two people who make a small special thing that machines are still not able to do, it's like an army of ultra specialized workers each doing something insanely unique, probably being redundant with 2-3 more people who do the same.

Why the fuck? that's like having a building in which you hire an artist to hand craft each brick from the bottom, not high tech at all.

When we'll we have actual high tech rockets and not this XIX century assembly line shit made by dirty monkeys with the same hand they used to finger their partner moments ago (yes probably even with the gloves on)

[Anonymous No.14789625]

Wasn't there supposed to be some news about T-mobile and SpaceX or was that scrubbed?

[Anonymous No.14789628]

>>14789625
7pm ct

[Anonymous No.14789630]

>>14789623
Isn't most of the starship process automated or at least on an assembly line?

[Anonymous No.14789635]

>>14789288
Zap Energy will be the first company to demonstrate net gain fusion
>>14789310
>Liking Scamalanche
You are fucking retarded

[Anonymous No.14789643]

>>14789050
>>14789061
>>14789087
Embarrassing.

[Anonymous No.14789651]

[Anonymous No.14789665]

>>14789643
lmao

[Anonymous No.14789677]

>>14789643
¡PUTA!

[Anonymous No.14789678]

>>14789635
>My scam fusion company GOOD, your scam fusion company BAD
Why don't you like the Orbitron device?

[Anonymous No.14789688]

[Anonymous No.14789693]

>>14789688
you'd think they wouldn't do this shit so close to the border, but I guess the Mexicans don't care

[Anonymous No.14789695]

>>14789688
New bird in Jared's fleet?

[Anonymous No.14789697]

>>14787622
it is an abomination - Leviticus 18:22

[Anonymous No.14789702]

>>14789635
cool, now go invest in them. oh wait, you can't.

[Anonymous No.14789709]

>>14788235
why can't it be done by satellites

[Anonymous No.14789716]

>>14789678
Because it's a rehashing of beam on beam fusion. The cross-section of p-B11 fusion that they are attempting is so small that they need kiloamps -megaamps of beam current to generate any appreciable power. Their confinement will destabilize before then
>But they recirculate the beams!
A recirculating beam is still a beam
Look into the two-stream instability: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-stream_instability
It would extend to the millions of what are effectively recirculating beams at different velocities they're essentially creating
They didn't even invent the Orbitron, the Lockheed fusion guy Tom McGuire did in his PhD thesis and basically disowned it

[Anonymous No.14789718]

>>14788381
SpaceX has been saying first cargo ship is going to Mars in 2020

[Anonymous No.14789722]

>>14789702
I think all fusion companies at this point are poor investments
Zap is just the least poor choice

[Anonymous No.14789731]

>>14788770
the next telescope will be a shrouded ~6m telescope and will cost less than half of JWST thank Starship

[Anonymous No.14789739]

>>14789623
>>14789630
Automation is the last step in design work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhuaVsOAMFc

[Anonymous No.14789744]

>>14789643
Kek. At this pace the full static is happening by the end of the year

[Anonymous No.14789751]

>>14789693
they can't see the plane

[Anonymous No.14789763]

>>14789716
Recirculating beam fusion was shown to be hopeless back in the 1950s. I'll be shocked if Avalanche isn't bankrupt or "pivoting" in the next 5 years.

[Anonymous No.14789772]

>>14789643
Cronch

[Anonymous No.14789785]

All we're doing today is spin prime tests. Gotta validate and check everything first

[Anonymous No.14789803]

>>14789739
>>14789630
yeah but starship gets a pass because it's new. SLS has been arguibly more than 20(or even 40 years) in development and still each piece is basically chiseled by hand by an excentric guru which holds most of the blueprints in its head, when will this change?

[Anonymous No.14789820]

>>14789803
>when will this change?
Anon, let's back up a step. Why do you think the SLS exists?

[Anonymous No.14789825]

>>14789820
Because they're gonna launch it in 4 days you dumb nigger.

[Anonymous No.14789826]

>>14789803
It'll change when Starship, and the Chinese starship ripoff are the only launch systems still in production and everybody else goes out of business.

[Anonymous No.14789830]

why didn't HBO commission SpaceX to melt them a real iron throne with the merlin engines, what they have right now looks unrealistic af

[Anonymous No.14789831]

>>14789825
No, you illiterate moron. I mean why has the Federal government/NASA created this rocket in the first place?

[Anonymous No.14789832]

>>14788748
>>14788788
>>14788797
>>14788835
>>14789217
>>14789249
Paid shills are promoting two scam companies at the same time. What a cohencidence. /biz/ is that way.

[Anonymous No.14789834]

>>14789831
Grift

[Anonymous No.14789838]

>>14789832
>everything I don't like is the jews

nigger

[Anonymous No.14789845]

>>14789838
Earther

[Anonymous No.14789853]

>>14789832
I'm pretty sure actual /sfg/ retards are going to invest in spaceflight startups.

[Anonymous No.14789856]

>>14789834
Exactly. So why would they want to automate or make any part of the process more efficient?

That defeats the point. Like leaving unspent budget at the end of the fiscal year, it'll literally never happen.

[Anonymous No.14789875]

>>14789635
>Zap Energy will be the first company to demonstrate net gain fusion
Which would mean more funding but they're still not close to a viable commercial fusion reactor. IMO aneutronic fusion with direct energy conversion is the only type of fusion that could possibly hope to generate electricity at cost low enough to compete with other sources, like what Helion Energy is pursuing barring any fundamental technical issues and assuming the can find the helium-3 to startup.

[Anonymous No.14789876]

>>14789831
I like to think it came from a real place back when the Augustine commission recommended a 75t-to-orbit launcher for beyond LEO destinations

But they vastly underestimated how bad they are and continue to be at contract management

[Anonymous No.14789884]

EARTHER (derogatory)

[Anonymous No.14789908]

>>14789884
Why's it capitalized? What does it stand for?

[Anonymous No.14789922]

>>14789619
>I'm pretty sure a D-He3 reaction with D-D side reactions produces less neutrons than an exclusively D-D reaction.
Less but due to the extreme favorability of D-D side reactions, you need much more than 50% He3 concentration in the plasma to achieve a 50% reduction in neutron production, which therefore means you are going to be throwing away a lot of He3 during normal operation of your open cycle fusion thruster. He3 is currently about $1400 per gram, and deuterium is about $6.5 per gram.

[Anonymous No.14789923]

FSD is a scam.

[Anonymous No.14789933]

>>14789923
nothing makes me angrier than this kind of cynical conservatism that comes out of the mouths of self-styled progressives

[Anonymous No.14789934]

will there be a real static today

[Anonymous No.14789936]

>>14789619
>Also, I'm pretty sure buying He-3 for 1300 a gram is still affordable if it's a multibillion dollar mission to another planet.
Circular logic, if a spacecraft able to carry humans using one of these fusion thrusters needs 5 metric tons of helium 3 to do a Jupiter round trip for example, that's $6.5 billion dollars right there. That's as much of a barrier to performing the mission as anything.

[Anonymous No.14789938]

>>14789709
I'm guessing it's easier to get many different angles with a plane, and the more you have the better the mesh

[Anonymous No.14789950]

>>14789716
>p-B11 fusion
Holy shit, it's even more of a meme than He3 fusion

[Anonymous No.14789952]

>>14789934

[Anonymous No.14789958]

>>14789908
It cannot be said lightly

[Anonymous No.14789965]

>>14789936
It might honestly be worth billions of dollars for a 20,000 ISP propellent.

Of course, it would also make moon/jupiter mining actually viable.

[Anonymous No.14789967]

>>14789933
Cynical people are hopeless people.

They don't matter in long run, what matters are people who move things, and do things. Thats what matters.

[Anonymous No.14789968]

>>14789958
Not when they're chained under all that gravity lolol

[Anonymous No.14789974]

Ionic ramjet versus aids

[Anonymous No.14789977]

>>14789884
RUST SUCKER (obscenity)

[Anonymous No.14789983]

>>14789968
Big talk from a stick insect

[Anonymous No.14789995]

>>14789952
actually we are guaranteed to know by the end of the day pseud

[Anonymous No.14790003]

>>14789923
I believe that FSD is indeed a functioning technology, and is a threat to liberty. Glowies could easily hack your car to kidnap you remotely or take away your car, or have it drive off while you're away to be "modified" and then quietly return where you left it before you get back.

[Anonymous No.14790009]

>>14790003
Ok schizo

[Anonymous No.14790013]

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE I WANT A STATIC

[Anonymous No.14790019]

>>14789643
This company needs to be partitioned and its pieces sold. They literally pushed the arm into the scaffolding on the tower

[Anonymous No.14790021]

>>14789475
I don't know, but /sfg/ would have such a collective boner as has never been seen before.

[Anonymous No.14790026]

>>14789826
>Chinese starship ripoff
stop, i can only get so erect. And not because i want those commies to accomplish anything, i just want them to inadvertantly fuel the lifeblood which powers our great nation and every good thing ever: competition.

Starship needs good competition asap, they are doing incredibly well considering they have basically a total monopoly over reusable space launches. That they use it for good because musk is morally superior promoting the advancement of technology of good things for people and mankind is anecdotal, because one cant rely on a monopoly being run by a morally superior being, thats actually rare, what we need is actual competition, and in the arena of reusable launch vehicles, the clooooosest one we might find is relativity space but they are far away.
Blue origin is a complete joke, even if they do succeed in making their inferior rocket in 10 years, it will still have spent 10 billion in development and cost a lot more per launch with less capacity. A total ego project not related to productive reality.

One might argue electron space, but in reality they are actually focused on smallsat launch which is a niche that might keep them in business but it does not advance cheap manned spaceflight

so when it comes down to it, its just spacex as a real player

relativity as a player which has shown real investment and capacity to do sometjhing real

and the chinese because they are known for doing what needs to be done, no matter what no matter the cost, specifically if it implies copying foreign technologies, sometimes with innovation but most of the time not. But in any case wht is neede dis eomoen who competes whoever whatevere

[Anonymous No.14790027]

>>14789965
>It might honestly be worth billions of dollars for a 20,000 ISP propellent.
Dual stage 4 grid ion thrusters already exist and do 20,000 Isp, produce 2.5 newtons of thrust and require 250 kW of electricity.

[Anonymous No.14790028]

>>14790003
FSD is only not a threat to liberty if
1. it exists on a physically separate set of computers
2. there's an escape lever the driver can pull that physically disconnects the FSD computer from control of the car and reasserts manual control
Neither of those is true in current Teslas.

[Anonymous No.14790029]

>>14789965
>20,000 ISP propellent
That is achievable with lithium-fueled electric propulsion. The tradeoff of high Isp is lower thrust at the same amount of power thus slower acceleration, so DFD wouldn't be of much use for most of the solar system. A torch drive could skirt this harsh reality by being immensely powerful but low mass, otherwise, high Isp like >10,000 seconds is vastly overrated.
>Of course, it would also make moon/jupiter mining actually viable
No it wouldn't.

[Anonymous No.14790035]

>>14790029
You could make a DFD into a pseudo torch drive by using LH2, LOX, or water injected into the exhaust, LANTR style. Isp over 5000s with high thrust beats Isp over 20,000s with snail acceleration.

[Anonymous No.14790044]

>>14789476
>Would you trust this man enough to pay him $100 dollars for his magic box?
Only if his name was Ay-O.

[Anonymous No.14790048]

>>14790044
>Fingerbox posting makes a comeback
WHAT YEAR IS IT

[Anonymous No.14790056]

>>14790029
Mining Jupiter maybe won't ever be viable. We would basically need a form of propulsion technology that would allow us to put over 50,000 m/s of delta V into a single stage that could pull over 45 m/s^2 with full propellant tanks AND payload mass, just to be able to shuttle any amount of material from the cloud tops to low Jupiter orbit. That would be challenging to pull off even with a legit Orion drive.
The only other conceivable option would be to build a series of space elevators hanging from orbital rings which would let cargo vehicles climb up into vacuum then accelerate into orbit via electromagnetic acceleration. Building just one orbital ring around Jupiter would be the equivalent of building dozens of rings around Earth, and it would be more difficult too, since you don't get any free stabilization effects due to being tethered to the surface, since there is no surface.

[Anonymous No.14790065]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA STATIC

[Anonymous No.14790075]

>>14790056
first asteroid mining which will start space economy will be obscene amounts of platinum and gold from easily accesible asteroids which take little delta v to get there.
>BUT THE PRICES WILL GO DOWN
yes, it will not last forever but they will make a killing on the first couple hundreds of tons of platinum they will make a retarded profit, and they'll create quite the infrastructure in the process. Hopefull by then they will have found something better to do upt here

[Anonymous No.14790078]

>>14790035
You don't just get a high mass flow rate for free, though. You essentially have a fixed energy output, and adding mass to that increases thrust and decreases Isp roughly in step. You alluded to this, but it's important to note that even if you were adding just hydrogen to the output of the fusion thruster, and thus adding mass in the most efficient way possible, you would still only get a very low level of thrust at 5000 Isp. You're not going from 10 newtons at 20,000 Isp to 10,000 newtons at 5000 Isp, you're going from 10 N to like 20N. This is still useful if you're doing the same 5000 m/s trajectory over and over and can refill on your cheap inert propellant at both ends, because it makes the energy released by your actual fusion fuel more effective, but you're not going to win any drag races doing this, and you're absolutely not even approaching torch drive territory.

[Anonymous No.14790086]

Sooooooooooo what are we waiting for?

[Anonymous No.14790089]

>>14790086
half life 3

[Anonymous No.14790090]

>>14788509
That would mean detecting Hawking radiation. A great discovery.

[Anonymous No.14790095]

>>14790075
Asteroid mining for platinum group metals to sell to Earth will not be as extremely profitable as many people seem to believe. Sure, exposed protoplanetary core material is often enriched in platinum group metals and is equivalent to a high grade ore on Earth, but that shit still needs to be heavily processed to actually collect the metals we're interested in. This would be an industry requiring huge investment in centrifugal or zero G industry for processing millions of tons of metallic asteroid for its platinum group metal content, then transporting those metals to Earth to sell. This will not be a high margin business.
Asteroid mining will mostly be done by people colonizing the asteroid belt, and they'll be looking for structural metals and important nonmetals like carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous, and sulfur, moreso than "precious" metals.

[Anonymous No.14790111]

>>14789009
>There is a bit of France in South America
I've never heard about that. I wonder what the place is like.

[Anonymous No.14790115]

>>14790111
they launch rockets from it

[Anonymous No.14790121]

>>14789217
STOKE? More like STROKE.

[Anonymous No.14790123]

>>14790111
Are you blind anon?

[Anonymous No.14790136]

>>14789693
>Mexicans
>air force
lol, lmao

[Anonymous No.14790142]

>>14790136
mexicans invented a warp drive and ksp, which is arguibly a better space accomplishment than the sls. So i would keep my eyes on them

[Anonymous No.14790145]

> Lisa Watson-Morgan, NASA HLS manager, says the agency is working with SpaceX to fly science payloads on the Starship uncrewed lunar landing demo flight. Also want to “take up and down as much as we can” on Artemis 3, given Starship’s large capacity.
Coolio

[Anonymous No.14790152]

>>14790145
>HLS is going to mog all of CLPS

[Anonymous No.14790176]

Some normies friends today were talking about the "big nasa rocket" today.
"biggest rocket ever" and then the discussion devolved in to shitting on musk.
I hid my power level but holly fuck i hate normies.

[Anonymous No.14790178]

>>14790145
Might be too short a notice to get a rover onboard, but 100 tons of raw materials, solar panels, etc would be a great way to start a base camp if they land near the south pole

[Anonymous No.14790186]

>>14789564
messing with astronomers is a good thing faggot

[Anonymous No.14790190]

>>14790142
>mexicans

[Anonymous No.14790193]

>>14790176
if they're that stupid they shouldn't be your friends

[Anonymous No.14790194]

>>14790176
same, I wish it was easier to communicate the degree to which spacex embarrasses other rocket programs without sounding like you're a musk fellatio enthusiast

[Anonymous No.14790210]

>>14790193
I want girls to touch my peepee so no, i'm not going to distance myself from my normie friendgroups.

[Anonymous No.14790211]

>>14790176
reminder that SS is getting delayed more than SLS

[Anonymous No.14790213]

>>14790111
It's basically the Korou launch complex surrounded by natives and nogs.

[Anonymous No.14790214]

>>14790111
Don't tell this guy about Saint Pierre et Miquelon

[Anonymous No.14790218]

>>14790210
>I want girls to touch my peepee
how to achieve this

[Anonymous No.14790220]

>>14790211
Reminder that SLS will explode on the pad.

[Anonymous No.14790221]

>>14790190
Hey, the Super Tucano is a good little counterinsurgency plane. The Afghans did well with them.

[Anonymous No.14790223]

>Falcon Heavy is 64 tons to orbit
>SLS Block 1 is 70 tons to orbit

What is the point of SLS

[Anonymous No.14790227]

>>14790223
It provides corporate welfare in all fifty states

[Anonymous No.14790231]

>>14790223
sweetie FH can't launch the most important capsule ever built to the moon.

[Anonymous No.14790232]

>>14790223
SLS Block 1 is 95 tons to orbit, get it right if you're going to shitpost

[Anonymous No.14790233]

>>14790214
Very interesting. France is bigger than I thought.

[Anonymous No.14790234]

So they only did 2 spin primes today?

[Anonymous No.14790235]

>>14790221
That's PC-7

[Anonymous No.14790241]

>>14790233
France's refusal to decolonize post-Revolution is a lesson for the history books

[Anonymous No.14790243]

NSF grifters BTFO by SpaceX you loev to see it get fukked grifters maybe put up a pic of your merch shop now for B7.1's entier 1 hour trek to the padlmao

[Anonymous No.14790247]

>>14790241
A bad lesson or a good lesson? Either way, I respect them for refusing to give up territory.

[Anonymous No.14790248]

>>14790241
Which revolution?

[Anonymous No.14790251]

I want to introduce microbes to Europa. They would flourish and take over the ocean and evolve. So much more interesting than a dead ocean

[Anonymous No.14790254]

>>14790233
biggest EEZ in the world

[Anonymous No.14790256]

[Anonymous No.14790260]

highest resolution of Europa ever taken. Clipper will do much better because it will fly lower (as low as 25km) and will have a better camera

[Anonymous No.14790265]

[Anonymous No.14790277]

>>14790111
>I wonder what the place is like
watch Papillon it hasnt changed

[Anonymous No.14790282]

>>14790241
It's a shame that they had to get rid of Vietnam. A spaceport near Saigon could have been great.

[Anonymous No.14790284]

Redwire’a Artemis I patch

[Anonymous No.14790289]

All this talk about investing in fusion scam companies, just invest in SpaceX
>but they’re not publicly traded
Retard, I’ve been Starlinkmaxxing, which is basically the same as investing in spacex I own over 100 terminals with more on the way

[Anonymous No.14790295]

>>14790289
explain

[Anonymous No.14790296]

markets are efficient, all investing strategies yield the same result.

[Anonymous No.14790301]

>>14789564
oh, so now astronomy IS important, what about Earth problems? weren't we supposed to tackle those first?

[Anonymous No.14790305]

>>14790289
The fuck is going on in that building.

[Anonymous No.14790309]

>>14790284
who?

[Anonymous No.14790310]

>>14790305
Antenna R&D most likely.

[Anonymous No.14790311]

I see there are retards loose as usual
anybody waiting to see what the spaceX + T-Mobile update is? I should probably go to sleep because its going to be something obvious like mobile internet backhaul with satellites and a few min video but whatever lol
happening in 2h

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzli-Ww26Qs

[Anonymous No.14790312]

>>14790289
>bird flies over

[Anonymous No.14790320]

all engine static today for starship?

[Anonymous No.14790325]

>>14790309
They make cameras and sensors for Orion

[Anonymous No.14790327]

>>14790325
>eyes of orion
oh thats cool

[Anonymous No.14790332]

>>14789417
>>14789425

roged :DD

[Anonymous No.14790333]

[Anonymous No.14790337]

>>14790311
>happening in 2h
2h probably, 2h30m definitely
elon will arrive late as usual lol

[Anonymous No.14790344]

>>14790333
Looks like a toy for 6 year olds

[Anonymous No.14790352]

>>14790333
Thunderbirds vibes lol

[Anonymous No.14790358]

>>14789623
because rockets haven't been mass produced yet, not really
so there have been no "factories" at all yet basically

[Anonymous No.14790367]

>>14790358
but still it's a high tech endeavour. Forget about mass production, what about precision and reliability?

you're relying on literally one person with a very specific set of skills and education who made it more specific only for this project, if he gets a stomache ache, then boom, no more rocket. Im not even kidding, major hurdles have been introduced in aerospace, even military projects, because they still do things like XVIII artisans. And it's not just one bizarre component, basically every bolt works that way

[Anonymous No.14790371]

>>14790194
basically talking about anything musk that has succeeded or isn't delayed makes you sound like a musk fellatio enthusiast

[Anonymous No.14790372]

I can't believe SLS is already here

[Anonymous No.14790390]

>>14789564
Elon Musk built the biggest failure electric car that is bleeding money and failing left and right and catches fire
Elon Musk built the worst rocket ever that keeps blowing up constantly and sucks so much nasa had to build their own
Elon Musk built satelite dishes that melt and overall dont work at all

[Anonymous No.14790391]

>>14790372
late, over budget, obsolete before it even started development

[Anonymous No.14790394]

>>14790358
>>14790367
This is true. Even Astra never got away from hand-fitting bullshit or engineer personality fights and they were TRYING to mass produce. I ended up leaving because the upper stage team responsible for the consistent failures of Rocket 3 was never held accountable and Rocket 4 is doomed to small launch hell because the licensing agreement with Firefly prevents using the Reaver design in >=1000kg payload rockets for multiple years. The stock I was getting paid in falling 90% since I signed on didn't help either.

t. former astranon

[Anonymous No.14790400]

>>14790394
Kek, btfo. You job hunting now?

[Anonymous No.14790402]

>>14790394
Good luck bro, I'm rooting for you

Need more roggets to launch our payloads

[Anonymous No.14790403]

>>14790394
>t. former astranon
Wtf anon is it really that bad?

[Anonymous No.14790418]

MARS
IS
A
LIVING
WORLD

[Anonymous No.14790422]

>>14790296
t. Montano
Strong efficient market theory is the dumbest shit ever.

[Anonymous No.14790423]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBHIQDUHR9A

Static fire within 5-10 mins

[Anonymous No.14790429]

>>14790400
No, I already found another job. I start next month.

>>14790402
Thanks.

>>14790403
The head of the software org literally had a heart attack from stress and retired. Employees there since Rocket 1 and 2 were bailing. The stock (ticker ASTR) fell under a dollar this week. 28 more trading days like that and it gets delisted from NASDAQ. It's fucking over, guys.

[Anonymous No.14790430]

[Anonymous No.14790439]

ABORT

[Anonymous No.14790440]

>>14790394
>the licensing agreement with Firefly prevents using the Reaver design in >=1000kg payload rockets for multiple years
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why you don't ever buy your engines from another company.

Good market protection for Alpha though.

[Anonymous No.14790459]

>The ASE consisted of three major components. A set of three geophones was laid out in a line by an astronaut from the Central Station to detect the explosions. A mortar package was designed to lob a set of four grenades varying distances away from the ALSEP. Ranging of the grenade was achieved through the assumption of ideal ballistic trajectories.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Seismic_Experiment
is there film of this in operation? will Artemis have a mortar?

[Anonymous No.14790481]

>>14790429
>No, I already found another job. I start next month.
That's good. I gave you a lot of shit over the past year but I'm glad you turned a new leaf.

[Anonymous No.14790486]

>>14790459
This time it will have a proper 155mm cannon

[Anonymous No.14790517]

>>14790481
stress eating?

[Anonymous No.14790524]

>>14790517
Lack of sleep

[Anonymous No.14790531]

>>14790486
take it easy, we're not making a Western here. 75mm is plenty

[Anonymous No.14790537]

>>14790517
>>14790524
Probably a bit of both 2bh. She was hitting the free snacks pretty hard this year.

[Anonymous No.14790541]

jesus fuck these nasa spaceflight people are annoying

[Anonymous No.14790549]

>>14790541
I've switched to SpaceflightNow, much less autism

[Anonymous No.14790552]

>>14790541
is that monkeypox on his cheek?

[Anonymous No.14790554]

>>14790541
I hate the retards who pay money to asks questions no one outside of SpaceX can answer.

[Anonymous No.14790584]

>>14790541
LabPadre is so much more watchable.

[Anonymous No.14790587]

so no static fire huh

[Anonymous No.14790593]

>>14790587
d/w there will be another 5 hour commentary stream tomorrow make sure you buy some merch btw did you check out our new T-shirt?

[Anonymous No.14790594]

>>14790524
Can lack of sleep really cause this. I look like the one on the left and wonder what I would look like if I got enough sleep

[Anonymous No.14790607]

~30 mins till SpaceX/Tmobile stream

[Anonymous No.14790614]

Who will be the first person on Mars?

[Anonymous No.14790626]

>>14789718
no they haven't been you faggot
2022 was the earliest cargo flight planned

[Anonymous No.14790634]

>>14790607
god I want a low power mobile starlink dish. For my tactical larping. ATAK can only do so much.

t. /k/

[Anonymous No.14790646]

>>14790607
30 minutes until early trading bumps up Tesla and T-Mobile stock by 10%

[Anonymous No.14790649]

>>14790607
What are we waiting for exactly?

[Anonymous No.14790652]

No static fires in boca chica today cos everybody went to a party.
Free booze and snacks

https://youtu.be/ZCkL4Ij5wgM

[Anonymous No.14790657]

I'm betting 26 minutes late on the stream starting

[Anonymous No.14790658]

>>14790649
SpaceX and T-Mobile are announcing a Starlink partnership. This is just T-Mobile coming to kiss the ring before they get trampled.

[Anonymous No.14790673]

>>14790652
what the fuck they actually have a party lmao

[Anonymous No.14790675]

PINK
wonder if it's just free T-M swag or T-M employees

[Anonymous No.14790685]

>>14790652
>>14790673

[Anonymous No.14790691]

>>14790685

[Anonymous No.14790692]

>>14790673
THEY ARE HAVING A PARTY AND I WAS NOT INVITED!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH

[Anonymous No.14790697]

TRUE LOVE WON'T DESERT YOU

[Anonymous No.14790705]

[Anonymous No.14790707]

>>14790614
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OR4N5OhcY9s#t=2m02s

[Anonymous No.14790710]

>>14790685
>>14790691
Modern fashion fuggin sucks

[Anonymous No.14790725]

but for real, why the party music? This announcement can't be that big of a deal can it?

[Anonymous No.14790726]

>Get Your Hands Up!
>>14790691
>1092px
which stream?

[Anonymous No.14790727]

sparklers

[Anonymous No.14790737]

>>14790726
lab is there

[Anonymous No.14790741]

https://youtu.be/QaXxAKHwvPU

[Anonymous No.14790743]

The official stream is live now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzli-Ww26Qs

[Anonymous No.14790744]

UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ

[Anonymous No.14790745]

literally why t-mobile, it’s the beaner internet provider

[Anonymous No.14790748]

This music.

Is Blade there slaying some vampires?

[Anonymous No.14790749]

Why weren't you invited, anon?

[Anonymous No.14790758]

the crowd's evenly split between spacex employees and t-mobile employees lmao

[Anonymous No.14790759]

looks like a sausagefest though lmao

[Anonymous No.14790760]

>>14790749

[Anonymous No.14790762]

>Starship and Starlink will have have T Mobile brands printed on them

[Anonymous No.14790766]

[Anonymous No.14790770]

>>14790745
verizon chose kuiper

[Anonymous No.14790776]

>>14790759
I count at least 8 women in that photo

[Anonymous No.14790777]

>>14790766
perfection

[Anonymous No.14790780]

[Anonymous No.14790779]

>>14790760

[Anonymous No.14790781]

>>14790776
i'd like to fuck them all

[Anonymous No.14790782]

>>14790759
Rockets, booze and snacks.
What else could you possibly want?

[Anonymous No.14790783]

AT&T - Blue Origin partnership announced

[Anonymous No.14790785]

26k people watching this

[Anonymous No.14790786]

>>14790782
Orbital Launch Testing.

[Anonymous No.14790787]

>>14790766
Based The Cheat poster.

[Anonymous No.14790792]

[Anonymous No.14790794]

this music is actually terrible, who picks this shit, it's a fucking 10 second looping clip, is this from the YouTube Audio Library?

[Anonymous No.14790795]

ITS starting

[Anonymous No.14790796]

>>14790786
i concede

[Anonymous No.14790797]

this guy probably does 96% of the programming work for T-mobile

[Anonymous No.14790800]

>>14790797
Old Man Unix

[Anonymous No.14790801]

I have a feeling this is going to use some capability that the sats had using SDR algorithm shit, so it's going to be literally just a software upgrade on SpaceX's side.

[Anonymous No.14790804]

Cheap satphone could actually be pretty fucking based

[Anonymous No.14790805]

>Black guy
>Women
/sfg/ gonna shit a brick LMAO

[Anonymous No.14790809]

direct to space without a ground station?

[Anonymous No.14790810]

No Elon

It's over

[Anonymous No.14790811]

>t-mobile guy soaking in elon's glory already

[Anonymous No.14790812]

lmao even cellphone guys are rocket geeks

[Anonymous No.14790813]

>>14790810
no wonder they hyped this, if people knew elon wasn't going, nobody would give a shit

[Anonymous No.14790817]

Marketing words

[Anonymous No.14790821]

boring

[Anonymous No.14790824]

>>14790809
Without a tower you mean, there still needs to be a ground end somewhere. Once the laser links light up, this would literally connect the entire fucking planet for puny voice channels.

[Anonymous No.14790825]

>>14790804
>>14790809
>direct to space without a ground station
AST SpaceMobile is doing this normal phones.

[Anonymous No.14790826]

HOLY SHIT T-MOBILE BECOMES STARLINK SATPHONES WITH V2 SATELLITES
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

[Anonymous No.14790827]

>a t-mobile ad

[Anonymous No.14790828]

nice more bands

[Anonymous No.14790829]

>satphones integrated with starlink v2 on current spectrum
not bad

[Anonymous No.14790830]

how
how the fuck is a phone supposed to connect to starlink

[Anonymous No.14790831]

>Late next year
It's fucking nothing nevermind

[Anonymous No.14790833]

>>14790801
I was wrong, it's not just adding some SDR shit. But it's like they're putting a tower into every sat when they do.

[Anonymous No.14790835]

I predicted satellite backhaul or 5G over Starlink, I was pretty close

[Anonymous No.14790836]

>>14790825
I guess they have a competitor now (or will have next year)

[Anonymous No.14790838]

>works in foreign nations
>works at sea
I can practically hear the DoD and CIA nutting in their pants right now.

[Anonymous No.14790840]

>>14790233
>>14790241
their politicians are gay cucks and their rockets are gay cucks

[Anonymous No.14790841]

>>14790830
Super low bandwidth, extreme latency, barely works. kinda like t-mobile as normal

[Anonymous No.14790842]

>>14790831
They need the laser links to work first for this to have fully global coverage.

[Anonymous No.14790843]

alright I think the real announcement is done, time to bail

[Anonymous No.14790845]

Elon spotted!

[Anonymous No.14790847]

Elon on the stage

[Anonymous No.14790848]

He's here!

[Anonymous No.14790849]

>>14790830
It's the same technology.
It wont be able to get good upload speeds without a phased array antenna, but there's no reason the satellites can't connect to phones.

[Anonymous No.14790852]

trillion dollar technology here

[Anonymous No.14790853]

HOLY SHIT ITS ELONER I CARE NOW

[Anonymous No.14790855]

>It will enable /sfg/ access worldwide, friends

[Anonymous No.14790859]

Elon Sama

[Anonymous No.14790860]

>>14790853
based hfz poster

[Anonymous No.14790862]

They're even testing the sparklers during the event, maximum efficiency

[Anonymous No.14790865]

Wow who is this ugly guy?

[Anonymous No.14790867]

>>14790835
I wonder why they aren't doing the data backhaul for cell towers for places that can't afford full starlink terminals, maybe the revenue isnt just high enough

[Anonymous No.14790868]

>>14790855
>except in a cave, like in... Thailand

[Anonymous No.14790869]

Wow we're going to be able to date movies to the very day they turn this on and cellular access is available worldwide

[Anonymous No.14790870]

Every movie or TV or mystery/thriller novel writer working on a story that required dead zones just had to throw out their manuscripts.

[Anonymous No.14790872]

>>14790865
He looks skinnier, that's good.

[Anonymous No.14790874]

>Starlink Gen 2 is required
It's over

[Anonymous No.14790875]

>>14790870
>Character had an AT&T phone

[Anonymous No.14790878]

>>14790875
iToddlers BTFO

[Anonymous No.14790882]

He's really stuttering tonight, is that good or bad?

[Anonymous No.14790883]

>>14790870
or the person was poor

[Anonymous No.14790884]

This is so stupid, I will NEVER use T mobile

[Anonymous No.14790886]

DLC rescue call

[Anonymous No.14790887]

>>14790845
>satellites will connect to cell phones directly

[Anonymous No.14790888]

>>14790884
I'm forced to suffer T-Mobile because Verizon's shittier than they are

And T-Mobile's security/privacy track record is horrible

[Anonymous No.14790891]

>Antenna and Starship have a giant T-Mobile logo on it

[Anonymous No.14790892]

Astronobros...it's over...

[Anonymous No.14790895]

> lots of extra hardware on the satellites
so how are they going to get extra revenue from this? T-mobile said they will just give it for free with their most popular subscriptions, so I guess they assume they will get a lot more subs due to this? and then pay spacex through that

[Anonymous No.14790896]

>>14790870
remember The Rockford Files?
propulsion farms remembers
But seriously, people still writing stories that depend on lack of communications were already out of date years ago. Now they'll just have to get people lost in caves.

[Anonymous No.14790898]

>>14790892
Just think of it as a self licking ice cream cone

Make megaconstellations so big that ground based astronomy is impossible
Sell rocket launches for space-based observing platforms

[Anonymous No.14790899]

Every single SpaceX enjoyer needs to switch now to t mobile, spacex edition.

[Anonymous No.14790900]

>>14790836
Could be bullish for them if this will be exclusive to T-Mobile and spur their competitors

[Anonymous No.14790901]

>Starlink for rural 5G backhaul too
NUTT

[Anonymous No.14790904]

>Audience questions

Predict the autism

[Anonymous No.14790905]

>>14790904
Estronaut will ask about Raptor.

[Anonymous No.14790906]

I think all that talk about roaming was about how they have that frequency allocation for the US, so they're offering roaming in exchange for using the appropriate frequency allocations in other parts of the world.

[Anonymous No.14790908]

>>14790905
A E R O S P I K E

[Anonymous No.14790909]

>>14790900
it won't be, elon just talked about other providers contacting spacex so they can get this online worldwide

[Anonymous No.14790910]

BERGER

[Anonymous No.14790912]

>>14790892
Just wait until Starship starts launching constellations of mass-produced LUVOIR-class telescopes and the regular HLS ferry service starts building New Arecibo on the lunar far side.

Astronomy will not die, it will only evolve.

[Anonymous No.14790913]

Berger kun!

[Anonymous No.14790914]

>the phone you currently have will work
Yet another Elon lie

[Anonymous No.14790915]

>7m long v2 sats
L O N G

[Anonymous No.14790918]

>>14790910
That dude has a rough flight schedule
He flew out just for the party and then has to catch a red-eye for Florida

[Anonymous No.14790920]

>>14790759

[Anonymous No.14790921]

>>14790914
It'll work, but barely.

[Anonymous No.14790922]

so this thing hinges on starship working

[Anonymous No.14790923]

>>14790912
astronomy is already dead

[Anonymous No.14790925]

>if the Starship program is delayed..

[Anonymous No.14790929]

>>14790923
And who do we have to blame for that?

The Hawaiians.

Fuck Hawaii.

[Anonymous No.14790931]

> M I N I
> S T A R L I N K S

[Anonymous No.14790930]

>already has a backup plan in case starship doesn't work
it's over

[Anonymous No.14790932]

>>14790923
Astronomy is a dead science, we already know where the stars are and how they look like.

[Anonymous No.14790934]

>STARLINK V2 MINI ON F9 IF STARSHIP TAKES LONGER THAN EXPECTED
IT'S FUCKING OOOOOOVER HOLY SHIT

[Anonymous No.14790935]

>>14790909
Yeah I'm sure the other US providers and their global partners will just sit on their hands

[Anonymous No.14790937]

>>14790935
I can picture Dish's lawyers firing up their injunction filings now

[Anonymous No.14790938]

>2-4 megabits
oof

[Anonymous No.14790940]

>>14790938
For your phone, anywhere in the world.

This is amazing global internet without any hardware requirement (except your phone)

[Anonymous No.14790941]

>>14790938
lmao 56k modems are back baby

[Anonymous No.14790942]

>>14790940
elon promised 10 trillion niggabits and fails to deliver. he is a fraud, a liar

[Anonymous No.14790944]

>>14790940
>For your phone, anywhere in the world.
*for an entire Starlink cell

[Anonymous No.14790945]

>>14790938
per cell, which are larger than standard terrestrial mobile phone cells, not per user.

[Anonymous No.14790949]

lol she is retarded

[Anonymous No.14790952]

>>14790938
It's basically text and voice only service.
Think of if like current sat-phones, but works on every phone.

[Anonymous No.14790951]

One person per Starlink satellite

[Anonymous No.14790953]

>>14790938
>>14790940
2-4mB per cell, not a cell phone. You're gonna be connection on the order of hundreds of bits per second.

But at presumably low latency, so for text, who fucking cares.

[Anonymous No.14790954]

time to dig up telegram message condensing guides

[Anonymous No.14790955]

>>14790938
for texting and calling, it's pretty huge. As bandwidth increases with each new generation of satellites, this will go up. Nascent integrations always tend to aim on the more conservative side of the numbers rather than median or ideal.

The other thing to keep in mind is that this integration will undoubtedly play a role with Starlink Gen2 on the Moon and Mars as well, for communication via "smart devices" across the lunar and Mars surface area.

[Anonymous No.14790956]

>deaf latina
who invites these people?

[Anonymous No.14790958]

>>14790942
but muh obama fone

[Anonymous No.14790959]

Not 2-4 megabits per person, PER CELL. so if there is 1000 people in a cell, that 2 megabits gets split between all of them. MEGA OOF

[Anonymous No.14790961]

>>14790955
>The other thing to keep in mind is that this integration will undoubtedly play a role with Starlink Gen2 on the Moon and Mars as well, for communication via "smart devices" across the lunar and Mars surface area.
Oh shit I didn't even think of that. A full Starlink antenna draws almost a kilowatt so being able to use fucky little IoT antennas saves a massive amount of power/radiator budget.

[Anonymous No.14790962]

>>14790945
for the purpose of "cell reception in the middle of nowhere" you're probably the only person using starlink in that cell
>tfw can't stream video on my phone in the middle of a vast desert because there's someone three dunes over downloading porn

[Anonymous No.14790967]

>>14790953
Its 2-4 Mbps for per cell internet connectivity world wide without any hardware requirement. So if you're out in the wild and you have no cell coverage, you can still send text message/voice calls to anywhere else in the world. For the particular cell dead zone
areas, this means you could have upto 2000+ people in that dead zone per cell.
This is fucking ground breaking stuff.

[Anonymous No.14790969]

>T-Mobile on Mars
kek

[Anonymous No.14790972]

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1562956451538014209

[Anonymous No.14790973]

>Starlink V2 (+ T-Mobile) will fully emulate a cell phone tower
>It's complicated, but it works

[Anonymous No.14790974]

>>14790959
There isn't a 1000+ people living in cell dead zone, its irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.14790975]

Would any capable smart phone be able to pick this up for emergency calls?

[Anonymous No.14790976]

T-mobile on mars!

[Anonymous No.14790978]

>>14790967
Using "vanilla" hardware on the ground is the big win about this, usually sats have to use different frequencies than on land.

[Anonymous No.14790979]

>>14790959
its for places with no coverage, and for text messages/calls
its not for your crystal porn streaming retard

[Anonymous No.14790981]

Today T-Mobile has virtually raped all other carriers.
Normies will go crazy

[Anonymous No.14790982]

Just sold all my T-Mobile stock. Atrocious, this is the death throes of the company to partner with known scam artist, Elon Musk.

[Anonymous No.14790986]

This also means that Teslas can connect to starlink.

[Anonymous No.14790989]

>>14790975
>Would any capable smart phone be able to pick this up for emergency calls?
As long as you are connected to T-Mobile tm.

[Anonymous No.14790990]

>>14790973
>T-Mobile on Mars
No more questions.

[Anonymous No.14790991]

>>14790978
Using a LEO constellation is also a major win. Existing satphones were all either Molnya/Tundra (Russian) or GEO (everyone else) which had the predictable effects on latency and throughput.

[Anonymous No.14790992]

>>14790962
>>14790967
Cells are ~90 square miles, they're quite large.

Also, just as a reference, these utterly insane, hardcore, wild off the grid areas that have no cell service also include.... my house, where I am right now. Loads of people in America have no cell service, this is not some niche problem. Once you leave large cities, cell service is intermittent pretty much everywhere in America.

[Anonymous No.14790993]

>>14790940
>>14790959
AST can achieve in excess of 25 mbps according to a letter they wrote to the FCC. Almost like this is an application that needs dedicated satellites and not something that piggybacks off Starlink.

[Anonymous No.14790994]

>>14790986
Yeah, it also helps with GPS service since something similar like a cell triangulation network could be utilized for their cars. Possibly providing a level of redundancy/accuracy backup.

[Anonymous No.14791000]

>>14790992
For that scenario what's going to be more likely is Starlink as backhaul for T-Mobile ground stations. Running fiber across long distances in rural areas sucks. A cell tower with a Starlink on top of a computer shed and a power line is much easier to arrange.

[Anonymous No.14791003]

>>14790993
This is a scam

[Anonymous No.14791004]

>>14790961
Exactly. So with this kind of integration, suddenly doing all kinds of small scale science but at large volume simultaneously across a grid, has major implications.

Take for example the helicopter flying about on Mars. Right now, its tying itself back to the rover and piggybacking signals that way. But if it could, using its own internal power source talk to an overhead satellite via drawing the same amount of power as standard cell phone, then you could have dozens or even hundreds of these flying within a 100 square kilometer surface area doing all kinds of research and geospatial mapping. Topographical or LiDAR/Radar type data which has lower bandwidth requirements than visual data such as pictures and video, can all be collated at large scale to with each drone taking low resolution scans; and cumulatively generating a reinforced high resolution output either back at a Mars base or back to Moon or Earth, for processing and additional analysis. Similarly for Moon, for drones flying about looking for ice deposits.

Like, imagine sending a drone down a lava tube with a signal repeater at the edge of the surface hole and maybe another repeater at the base of the hole, then the drone flies about and the signal is 2 hops back up to the satellite. 2-4Mbps in that context is profound for science. Hell, consider this: https://hub.jhu.edu/2015/07/17/new-horizons-data-transmission/ | the New Horizons probe all the way out at Pluto and beyond, is sending data back at 1-2Kbps. This integration for science probes, for example, is 1-2,000x improved with functionally useful latency.

[Anonymous No.14791007]

>>14791000
For "that scenario" what's going to be more likely is that literally nothing fucking happens like always because it would require America investing in infrastructure

[Anonymous No.14791008]

>just woke up
how many engines did they static fire today

[Anonymous No.14791009]

This deal is to fuck over dishy isn't?

[Anonymous No.14791010]

>>14790429
whats the new job? you dont have to dox yourself but is space stuff right?

[Anonymous No.14791012]

>>14790993
it's definitely going to be custom hardware on the satellites for picking up these signals

[Anonymous No.14791013]

>>14791008
Zero. But hey, we now have a backup planfor Starlink v2 in the expectation that Starlink will fail

[Anonymous No.14791014]

>>14791007
That's my point, it doesn't require any new (semi-)public infrastructure except your power company running a cable. It's just T-Mobile putting up towers. The cost of running fiber is the ENTIRE problem with rural cell service. I spent years working with rural MSPs so I'm well aware of the problem.

[Anonymous No.14791015]

>>14791003
Okay buddy

[Anonymous No.14791016]

>>14790934
>>14790931
Starship bros this can't be happening....

[Anonymous No.14791017]

>covering up the planet in 5G, giving everyone vaids
thanks, elon

[Anonymous No.14791020]

>>14791017
get your vaccine retard

[Anonymous No.14791021]

>>14791014
Tesla solar panels and batteries.

Cell towers everywhere. No cables needed

[Anonymous No.14791022]

>>14790993
You need to buy dedicated sat phones/contract with those companies. This is T-mobile/Starlink collab such that your current T-mobile phones can access cell usage in emergency situations anywhere in the world. And you don't need to buy any expensive phone or plans to get those free data usage.

[Anonymous No.14791023]

>>14791004
how many mini-drones could a starship fit? Thousands I guess?

[Anonymous No.14791025]

So is this related to what the Swarm guys were recently talking about doing at SpaceX?

>>14790993
They might be assuming different cell sizes? I'd still expect AST's dedicated satellites to perform better, their antenna is also a bit larger.

[Anonymous No.14791027]

>/k/ jannies don't like battlefield satcom as relevant to war
Every day my desire to buy out this site and fire the current administration grows.

[Anonymous No.14791029]

>>14791004
>>14791023

There's parts of South American rainforests, parts of the Saharan Desert, all across Greenland and Antarctica, that we have no data in. There's huge cave systems with exposed caverns all around the world that we have not been able to do enough science around/with. These locations are all massive dead zones. But with 2-4Mbps unlocked, the science optionality as a result is immense. Same with all the oceans in the world.

SEVENTY FUCKING PERCENT OF OUR ENTIRE PLANET IS COVERED IN OCEAN. It's an ultra massive dead zone. Now imagine all the stuff in the oceans we haven't explored. All the life we haven't discovered. All the animal behavioral patterns we haven't figured out. The impacts of climactic effects at the ocean surface level and potentially deeper. Suddenly, putting random bouys out into the middle of fucking nowhere of the pacific and atlantic becomes a viable science grant proposal, because you basically only need a cell phone to be able to talk with an overhead Starlink cell. You could have dozens of these buoys collecting weather data and oceanography data and water temperature/chemical analysis data and feeding that back to research institutions the world over. In real time.

Scientists and academic institutions the world over just woke up and sat up straight and are looking at each other in a "holy fucking shit" kind of a look.

[Anonymous No.14791030]

>>14791009
that could be a big motivator, not sure how much revenue this is going to generate compared to starlink internet

[Anonymous No.14791032]

>>14791022
No you don't. AST will use standard phones, that's the point. There's another company doing this which name escapes me at the moment.

[Anonymous No.14791033]

>>14791014
>The cost of running fiber is the ENTIRE problem with rural cell service.
Well, they use point to point wireless a lot here already, so I wouldn't say it's the entire problem. There's a place where Starlink for backhaul makes sense though, sure.

[Anonymous No.14791035]

>>14791015
are these going to be LEO satellites? how many?

[Anonymous No.14791036]

I just realized that if you disabled images in 4chanX or whatever, you could basically go into the middle of the pacific and shit post on /sfg/ because its all text and text bandwidth even at this thread scale is fucking nothing. The most costly piece of bandwidth would be the fucking captcha image and interaction.

[Anonymous No.14791037]

>>14791029
>Scientists and academic institutions the world over just woke up and sat up straight and are looking at each other in a "holy fucking shit" kind of a look.
Well they will when they see it in the morning. It's after 5pm on the west coast of the US so the whole world is fucked off of work until tomorrow.

[Anonymous No.14791038]

>>14790992
>no cell service
Just to confirm. Here in Italy we can get poor to no (cell) coverage even in suburban areas: in the North I'm in a village with only one distant cell tower - that's blocked by a building unless I walk out into the road. My relatives in the south have a distant tower that reliably works only at the top floor of their building; when I walked their estate I couldn't get a signal.

[Anonymous No.14791040]

>>14791036
>The most costly piece of bandwidth would be the fucking captcha image and interaction.
Or just get a pass. Then it becomes simple JSON with API key auth (which is how phone apps work). It doesn't get much more lightweight than that.

[Anonymous No.14791041]

>>14791025
It's estimated at 1,200 gbps per satellite

[Anonymous No.14791042]

can we point the starlink lazers at china and eliminate them for good?

[Anonymous No.14791043]

>>14791009
Seems more like fucking over Iridium

>>14791030
Probably not much from the US, especially since they are having to include new hardware on the satellites, but likely this is something they already wanted to do, and T-Mobile is funding the up-front cost. This will be a very useful product in countries with little cellular infrastructure.

[Anonymous No.14791045]

Now that I think about it, this is actually pretty amazing stuff.

Imagine military drones with just a small cell phone gsm antenna on board. You can now get real time control information. All it needs to do is send small Kbps of packet information every second, maybe 2-3 Kbps and you can have an entire field that can have access to 1000+ drones in real time.

[Anonymous No.14791048]

what's the tl;dr ver for this announcement?

[Anonymous No.14791049]

>You could have dozens of these buoys collecting weather data and oceanography data and water temperature/chemical analysis data and feeding that back to research institutions the world over. In real time.

>Scientists and academic institutions the world over just woke up and sat up straight and are looking at each other in a "holy fucking shit" kind of a look.

You realize we just do this already right?

[Anonymous No.14791051]

>>14791048
Imagine current satellite phones, but it works on any phone.

[Anonymous No.14791052]

>>14791049
The point you're missing isn't that we could do this already, but that we couldn't do this at high volume. We have one of buoys, not hundreds or tens of thousands of buoys. That's the point. Extreme scale science.

[Anonymous No.14791053]

>>14791048
Your phone can have basic connectivity anywhere in the world with Starlink2 deployment as it will simulate a cell network. Its got a small bandwidth capacity per cell, but its more than enough to hundreds of thousands of texts from each individuals per cell.

In case of emegerncies, you'd never have to worry about cell connection issues ever again.

[Anonymous No.14791054]

>>14791049
Holy fuck I cannot believe Elon invented satellites this is gonna change everything.

[Anonymous No.14791058]

>>14791052
https://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/
>1339 stations deployed

Anon we literally just use fucking satellites for this already.

[Anonymous No.14791059]

>>14791035
Yes the attitude will be ~400 km and they were planning a constellation 243 satellites but I don't know if that's changed recently.

[Anonymous No.14791062]

>>14791058
Only 1339 stations and all this over decades of deployments. That number should be 100-1000x and that's what this unlocks. 1.4k is fucking tiny as fuck considering how god damn big this planet is.

[Anonymous No.14791065]

>>14791052
>>14791054
>>14791049
The point you're missing is that it doesn't need any expensive antenna setups now. A small solar panel/battery with cell phone antenna will send/receive any data now. For researchers, thats basically $0 hardware cost to them.

[Anonymous No.14791066]

Ummmm Starlink bros?

[Anonymous No.14791068]

>>14791045
Holy fuck
For the rc community this could be huge too
Long range flight without relying on 5g

[Anonymous No.14791071]

>>14791049
The difference is now all they will need is a regular cell phone antenna. You can buy them dirt cheap and they are extremely easy to integrate into electronics.

[Anonymous No.14791072]

>>14791066
Astronomy bros....

[Anonymous No.14791073]

>>14791066
It will get banned by astronomers

[Anonymous No.14791077]

>>14791008
no sf but lots of venting and two spin primes

[Anonymous No.14791079]

>>14791068
The only "issue" is you might not get 1080p bandwidths.

But if you've got some software skills, you can take pictures, convert them down to a more primitive form using onboard neural net vectorization(like Tesla FSD does), and then upload vector data back to drone controller in a much smaller packet, which can then be displayed on client's vectorTo3D visualizing software.

[Anonymous No.14791080]

>>14791073
the military wont let this tech get banned

[Anonymous No.14791081]

>>14791066
I hope it works, competition will drive even more innovation

[Anonymous No.14791084]

>>14791068
this wont have enough data for real time control
it would have to be mostly autonomous

[Anonymous No.14791089]

>>14791084
See >>14791079

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPCV4GKX9Dw

The data real time information can be compressed quite a lot

[Anonymous No.14791100]

I wonder about the implications this has on the Tesla fleet and the eventual Tesla Bot.

[Anonymous No.14791104]

>>14791022
No, AST is also targeting phones as-is. I was sceptical back then but clearly with multiple players doing this now it's doable.

>>14791029
>putting random bouys out into the middle of fucking nowhere of the pacific and atlantic becomes a viable science grant proposal
>dozens of these buoys collecting weather data and oceanography data and water temperature/chemical analysis data
You know this is already a thing with traditional satcom services, right? Satphones are also a thing and not prohibitively large for a simple buoy. Sure it's more expensive and slower, but that's not that terrible when you also need instruments and data doesn't have to be super low latency.

>>14791032
Globalstar? I think they're planning something with Apple or so.

[Anonymous No.14791106]

>>14791100
GPS + cell service + stolen car = Tesla knows where the car will be and alert the police in real time, or control it such that it can give their cars driving instructions to take it to the police station.

[Anonymous No.14791107]

>>14791084
You can do real time control but with reduced fidelity
Or just have it setup as a pathing system and rely on the controller to keep itself in the air
This is huge for rc solar planes

[Anonymous No.14791112]

>>14791104
>AST is also targeting phones as-is
You still need a separate contract with them aside from your current provider's access.

This is because their dedicated sats cost a lot (relative to Starlink) to launch while for T-mobile/SpaceX, this is basically a free hardware a and bit of software emulation going on in the background.

[Anonymous No.14791121]

https://spacenews.com/fcc-commissioner-criticizes-starlinks-900-million-subsidy-rejection/

>Carr said he was surprised to learn about the decision from a press release while he was on a work trip to Alaska, adding that it was made without a vote or authorization from the FCC’s Commissioners.

Confirmed it was a political decision. While all the FCC comissioners were out, the the Biden appointed Chair decided to make decision on her own without any consultation, without any voting, without any notification to the comissionoers.

[Anonymous No.14791123]

>>14791106
This is already a thing and knowledgeable thieves simply inhibit the cellular connectivity by removing hardware.

>>14791112
Definitely, but it's the same technical concept of operations. Starlink will likely have the cost advantage, but nothing is stopping AST from entering similar partnerships with carriers in theory. I was really just commenting on the hardware part.

[Anonymous No.14791124]

>>14791121
Take your meds

[Anonymous No.14791126]

>>14791121
Lmao and /sfg/ said it wasn't real

[Anonymous No.14791127]

Who else could make a megaconstellation? Apple? Microsoft? Starlink will be big, Kuiper could become #2, and OneWeb is European

[Anonymous No.14791128]

>>14791121
>In any case, Carr said broadband speed benchmarks under RDOF do not kick in for another three years.
>Carr also took aim at how Starlink’s price point contributed to the FCC’s decision, which highlighted how its users must purchase a $600 dish on top of a monthly subscription.
>The FCC is currently subsidizing slower internet services that cost consumers more, according to Carr.
>He also said the FCC is not authorized to deny winning RDOF bids based on the price of equipment, “let alone based on an arbitrary one selectively applied to one winner.”
If SpaceX sues, they might have a leg to stand on.

[Anonymous No.14791131]

>>14791121
American politics looks more and more like that of some corrupt shithole each day

[Anonymous No.14791133]

>>14791131
Attempting to unfuck this is both why Trump was elected in 2016 and robbed of it in 2020.

[Anonymous No.14791137]

>>14791133
Trump did absolutely nothing towards un-fucking government corruption.

[Anonymous No.14791138]

>>14791133
It's not like he actually did anything to fix it after being elected, but it was why he was elected

[Anonymous No.14791139]

>>14791104
I was thinking of Lynk Global. It's more on the Starlink side of things targeting messaging with limited data.
>>14791112
>You still need a separate contract with them aside from your current provider's access.
IIRC AST partnered with a bunch of big name providers and the service will be opt in after leaving the standard coverage zone. I hate to tell you this but most of the people living in areas without cell coverage aren't looking just to send a text if they get lost, they want internet but cannot afford a service like Starlink.

[Anonymous No.14791141]

>>14791121
This is just political posturing from Ajit Pai's anti-net neutrality buddy who'd be outnumbered by the other commissioners if it actually came to a vote. SpaceX probably has a few good arguments to sue, but every day that goes without them doing so is just another hint that the FCC may well be in the right here. Elon usually isn't quiet about getting fucked over.

>>14791127
Any of those companies with big war chests like Apple at least have the money to fund one.

[Anonymous No.14791143]

>>14791141
Spacex probably will sue.
The no vote part is fucked

[Anonymous No.14791145]

>>14791138
If he wasn't doing anything why were they so desperate to get ride of him?

Granted, he wasn't doing nearly enough, but what he was doing was more than enough to get the aristocracy terrified.

[Anonymous No.14791148]

>>14791145
>Granted, he wasn't doing nearly enough
There wasn't much he could do without a Congress willing to reinstate the President's power to immediately fire any executive branch employee for any reason. The current firing procedure takes years and was specifically designed to tarpit Presidents who tried to clean house.

[Anonymous No.14791154]

>>14791121
All the big decisions are made while the people in power are out. Elon getting kicked out of Paypal while on honeymoon vacatation. Starship being chosen for moon landing while NASA admin was still in the process of being chosen. Starlink getting their subsidy revoked while the comissioners were out of state meetings.

[Anonymous No.14791159]

>>14791127
If Apple really is announcing a similar service with the upcoming iPhone in a few weeks, they might actually be looking at financing a buildout of Globalstar's constellation.

[Anonymous No.14791278]

>For reference, Musk estimated on stream that this would allow each cell to serve around 1-2k simultaneous voice calls or tens to hundreds of thousands of simultaneous messages. But high-bandwidth activities would require a completely different spectrum and thus different tech.

https://twitter.com/13ericralph31/status/1562970496614158342

what did they mean by this?

[Anonymous No.14791279]

>>14790986
Musk just confirmed it too

[Anonymous No.14791281]

>>14788962
What about the train station thats hopelessly fucked up?

[Anonymous No.14791285]

>>14791278
Cell phone antennas are incredibly small and low power compared to Starlink dishes. That's why they have to add separate giant phased arrays to V2 to facilitate this, and even then the data rate will be comparably tiny.

[Anonymous No.14791290]

>>14790390
I'm posting from my self driving Tesla using mobile Starlink high speed internet on my way to catch the next weekly Falcon 9 launch in person btw

[Anonymous No.14791293]

>>14790418
I hope we kill it and install our own life.

[Anonymous No.14791295]

>>14791290
No you aren't

[Anonymous No.14791355]

>>14791290
Driving through a boring tunnel watching khan academy while getting sucked off by a tesla bot (ordered to do so by my Neuralink) while simultaneously being stimulated by pictures of Krystal generated by OpenAI, as well as those made by artists (paid for with Paypal)

[Anonymous No.14791363]

So what will Thundercunt and Cunt Sense Cunt say about starlink to cell phone?

[Anonymous No.14791365]

how the fuck does a stock smartphone connect directly to a starlink satellite? this just doesn't add up. communication goes both ways, how the fuck will my PHONE send a signal to a SATELLITE IN SPACE?

[Anonymous No.14791387]

Hello friends i am back
I have a couple of questions
What news do we have on arcaspace?
Did anyone updated the future space planes collage ?
Quick opinions on For all mankind 3??
Hop Wen < Wen Hop?

[Anonymous No.14791399]

[Anonymous No.14791402]

>>14791363
New BUSTED coming soon

[Anonymous No.14791403]

>>14791365
The satellite will have very, very big antennas and your phone will have very, very shit bitrates.

[Anonymous No.14791404]

>>14791365
the combination of software defined radio and cheap phased array antennas are basically magic, wait until they update the firmware to use Starlink as a SAR constellation

[Anonymous No.14791406]

>>14791404
It's like how cheap drones and cheap grenades become a college dorm budget ground attack aircraft.

[Anonymous No.14791407]

>>14791365
Assuming a cell phone tower has a maximum 45 mile line-of-sight range, you only have to make an antenna 64 times more sensitive than that.

[Anonymous No.14791408]

Starship why are you heaving, the fight just started

[Anonymous No.14791410]

>>14790931
Already exists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swarm_Technologies

[Anonymous No.14791411]

>>14791408
>Armstrong

They haven't even built the first Glenn

[Anonymous No.14791414]

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/space/os-bz-nasa-boeing-starliner-crew-flight-update-20220825-eefkd65ldje3nmcw7hmykqybme-story.html

D E L A Y E D

>NASA and Boeing officials announced Thursday that while progress continues on the CST-100 Starliner for its first-ever crewed mission, that launch won’t come until at least February 2023.

[Anonymous No.14791423]

>>14791414
Starship will beat Starliner to orbit. Boing! BTFO.

[Anonymous No.14791429]

https://nasawatch.com/artemis/were-going-back-to-the-moon-and-america-just-yawns/
>We’re Going Back To The Moon And America Just Yawns
>If NASA was actually in tune with what the public really thinks (as opposed to the slanted view that they imagine that the public has since everyone at NASA thinks space is great) then you’d see an ongoing adjustment in how NASA public Affairs, Education, and mission outreach efforts communicates. Instead, it is the same old stale approach that only transmits – but never listens. This is the basic take that this report from INMARSAT has on the public’s perception of the influence and importance of space in their daily lives – or lack thereof.
>– A majority of people surveyed are unaware of ground-breaking things happening in space.
>– 97% of people see space as a threat – with space junk and pollution the biggest perceived threats.
>– 1 in 9 people are ‘terrified’ of what could happen in space – just 1 in 3 are excited or hopeful.
>– Younger generations associate space more with science-fiction than science and they’re considerably more concerned and nervous about the impact of space on our lives.
>– However, older generations are much more hopeful and optimistic about what space brings to life on Earth.
>– Gen-Z is twice as likely to associate space with aliens, Star Wars and billionaires like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos than members of older generations.
/ourguy/ Keith Cowing takes NASA to the cleaners (again)

[Anonymous No.14791443]

>>14791429
To be honest the shit happening in space has almost nothing to do with the average person on Earth, but the average person derives benefits that are directly linked to space activity but they don't know that (GPS, weather sats, television broadcasts, agriculture/land use) or it's lame (satellite radio).

This is why when people talk about newspace they're talking about billionaire dick measuring contests and not what's possible, and when NASA does something they instead complain that money could go to social programs instead. Even Chinese and Russian space activity is viewed with fear and suspicion instead of competitive interest

[Anonymous No.14791457]

SPACE IS THE PLACE FOR THE HUMAN RACE

[Anonymous No.14791463]

>>14791408
what will come after New Armstrong? New Bezos?

[Anonymous No.14791468]

>>14791463
New Musk

[Anonymous No.14791472]

>>14791463
Blue Boner

[Anonymous No.14791477]

>>14791463
New Chapter 7 filings.

[Anonymous No.14791478]

>>14791463
New Shitfucknigger-asspoop

[Anonymous No.14791482]

>>14791468
already been done before, nothing new

[Anonymous No.14791484]

>>14791482
Just like ScamX

[Anonymous No.14791487]

Speaking of New "whatever", whatevet happened to New Lindbergh? BO actually trademarked that name in 2019.
https://trademark.trademarkia.com/new-lindbergh-88227372.html

[Anonymous No.14791490]

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-excitation_linear_prediction#:~:text=Mixed%2Dexcitation%20linear%20prediction%20(MELP,by%20the%20NSA%20and%20NATO.
I've been reading up a little here given the recent SpaceX/Tmobile 4Mbps cell network usage for voice coms. Musk said 2000+ will be supported.

If we use the 2.4Kbps MELP standard, 4Mbps / 2.4 Kbps = 1666 voice calls.

But we can go more. We can go 1.2Kbps mode, and it can support 3333 voice calls

Furthermore, 600/300 bps can be done as well, doubling further more into 6666 voice calls and 300 bps is a recent one too, which gives ~13,333 simultaenous voice calls.

The sacrifice is slight latency(bit of delay)/memory(absolutely trivial) usage for voice encoders on the phones, which should be of no issue for modern smartphones with 6+GB of ram.

[Anonymous No.14791496]

>>14791490
what Kbps was Counter Strike 1.3 voice comms? That's plenty for understanding people screaming with $3 microphones after all

[Anonymous No.14791519]

>>14791496
probably 1200bps, voice compresses really well

[Anonymous No.14791549]

>>14791490
You can go really down if you expect voice only, there's plenty good stuff around.
http://www.rowetel.com/?page_id=452

[Anonymous No.14791560]

>>14791549
Would it be possible to do audio->speech-to-text->audio?
That should allow for some really low bandwith

[Anonymous No.14791569]

>>14791429
>97% of people see space as a threat – with space junk and pollution
Weird how a lot of people who don't think humans should even go to space care so much about it being "polluted".

[Anonymous No.14791572]

>>14791569
I'm guessing that it was really badly worded
Like "Are there things in space you are worried about" or something

[Anonymous No.14791573]

>>14791429
>– 97% of people see space as a threat
Musk willing, one day we will make that 100%.

[Anonymous No.14791574]

>>14791560
If bandwidth and not computation on either side is the bottleneck, I'd assume so! But I think you could get funny results like JBIG data corruption with images, where you hear things different from what were said and you may not easily notice it. There's probably a way to make this negligible with the right algorithms

[Anonymous No.14791582]

>joining space force
>SLS (kek) and Starship finally launching soon
>might actually be able to go to space at some point in my life

Feels good man.

[Anonymous No.14791583]

>>14791573
the martians were a smart bait and switch, they made me think the show was gonna be kino, even the grunt. Then they all die, and the show goes to the shitter.

[Anonymous No.14791586]

>>14791429
NASA isn't interesting to the public because it's a bloated wokefest now. Women get hired and then try to run the show because they saw the NASA logo on a cute instagram post. White boomers who haven't retired yet are the only thing keeping it running at this point.

All the wizkid engineers go work at SpaceX now

[Anonymous No.14791595]

>Where on Mars would be the best place to search for fossils?
I'd bet on the northern plains since they might have been an ocean.

I'm assuming this is a manned research, so no rovers with drills.

[Anonymous No.14791599]

>>14791586
I think most people interested in space don't consider NASA as their best bet, especially if they're more interested in the scientific research. Most people in Europe go to ESA after joining into a university project, like a satellite.

[Anonymous No.14791602]

>>14791429
NASA needs to up their public relations game. They need to make space look fucking cool for your average normie. I wouldn't care less about "first woman, next man" or the fact that the SLS has the same capacity as 500 Olympic swimming pools. Elon sending his car into space, or the whole "making life interplanetary" thing looks much more interesting and exciting.

[Anonymous No.14791603]

>>14791463
New [one of these]
https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis-team/

[Anonymous No.14791605]

>>14791603
Can't wait for New Shaquesha

[Anonymous No.14791606]

>>14791595
I doubt there are any fossils on Mars, maybe only bacterial casts at most.
We don't know exactly how Mars became the desert it is today, or even how long it might have been habitable. It took over a billion years on Earth for any life to form, and it took another 2.9 billion years for that life to become multicellular

[Anonymous No.14791607]

>>14791603
Whoever gets killed in the Artemis 2 Launch Disaster (2027)

[Anonymous No.14791615]

>>14791606
Yeah but if we ever get manned mission there the spots fossils would be more likely should have priority anyway

[Anonymous No.14791616]

>>14791605
New Lizzo in tribute after she gracelessly expires

[Anonymous No.14791619]

>>14791603
I hate diversity hires as much as the next guy but every single one of these people is based. I have nothing but the utmost respect for astronauts no matter their background.

[Anonymous No.14791641]

>>14791127
>Kuiper could become #2
lol

[Anonymous No.14791709]

>>14791429
>Space missions stays years in development and funding hell
>The rocket finally launches
>Cool, now you have to wait 10 years of travelling into the outer solar system or 10 years of gravity assists
Kinda hard to be excited about space when I might not even be alive when interesting stuff happens.
They could make space more interesting if the missions were more frequent and had interesting targets
I was excited for Dragonfly until I read the plans and they are going to look at craters instead of going to the hydrocarbon lakes.
Also, I can't get excited for shit like Artemis when I know they are gonna cancel it as soon as the US gets into another money sucking war, even more with the fucking SLS that will only fly once per year.

[Anonymous No.14791767]

>>14791560
With enough horsepower or dedicated neural chips you could do a lot with a neural network approach because they can include a lot of information of how humans sound. Probably not worth the effort since existing compression shit for voice crush them in speed.

[Anonymous No.14791785]

>>14791767
>With enough horsepower or dedicated neural chips
Chuds can't understand that inference compute is rarely the limiting factor. You can do a whole lot on a Snapdragon chip, what limits you is having the 10 million dollar datacenter to go along with it.

[Anonymous No.14791796]

>go to Mars
>live there for a year
>your body is now eternally fucked up just from the change in gravity
>there is literally no way to change the gravity of Mars, not even through terraforming because the planet's mass remains much less than Earth's

Is there any way around this?

[Anonymous No.14791797]

>>14791796
>Is there any way around this?
As a matter of fact, there is! Reality will ensue, and your body does not get permanently fucked.

[Anonymous No.14791799]

>>14791796
it's the shill again. how come you didn't mention instant cancer from all the hecking radiatiorinos?

[Anonymous No.14791801]

>>14791796
Large centrifuges (basically like a train) going in circles.
I doubt this will always be needed, but for critical things like pregnancies maybe.

[Anonymous No.14791807]

>>14791797
>cope

>>14791799
Radiation is a problem that can be solved or worked around, gravity cannot.

>>14791801
>bro just live on a train

[Anonymous No.14791810]

>>14791801
kys

[Anonymous No.14791815]

>>14791807
>bro just live on a large platform going silently in circles during the duration of your wife's pregnancy
sure

>>14791810
uh, yes, let's just, uh build a space station on the surface of mars, that should work

[Anonymous No.14791816]

>>14791807
>i know what happens in partial g because i just know okay
that's why you're a shill

[Anonymous No.14791818]

>>14791815
your brain is unbelievably tiny

[Anonymous No.14791828]

>>14791818
Are you saying living on the surface is bad?
Ok, but not what we've been talking about.

Or are you the other dude and just hate centrifuges?
Because I seriously don't get it

btw I've quickly calculated that for 1g and a 300m radius the train-centrifuge would have to move at around 200km/h
Doable on Earth, even more doable in a near vacuum on Mars

[Anonymous No.14791833]

>>14791816
It's reasonable to assume our bodies would be heavily affected by gravity that's only 38% of Earth's. Our anatomies just weren't made for it long-term.

[Anonymous No.14791837]

>>14791833
>It's reasonable to assume

[Anonymous No.14791840]

>>14791833
People reasonably assumed that people would die traveling in trains going at 60 miles an hour. We have long term data in both 1G and 0G, and nobody is permanently fucked by the latter. Stop spouting bullshit and what-ifs until someone actually tests it. Fucking trolls.

[Anonymous No.14791841]

>>14791833
It's also reasonable to assume that most zero-g problems won't occur when there's a general down-pull acting on fluids, preventing pooling and shit

There are literally two data points for a very complex issue, we just don't know

[Anonymous No.14791852]

>>14791840
>We have long term data in both 1G and 0G, and nobody is permanently fucked by the latter
hey why can't I see!

[Anonymous No.14791873]

>>14791852
>percentage of astronauts who’ve experienced vision impairment is so low that it’s only affected men so far due to them outnumbering women in space

[Anonymous No.14791894]

>>14790691
>literally everyone is obese

[Anonymous No.14791921]

>>14787622
going where?

[Anonymous No.14791926]

>>14791560
so you could have dynamic quality depending on how many people are using the system, first just lower quality but at some point you get a machine voice at the other end
would be pretty funny, how many calls would that be then?

[Anonymous No.14791930]

>>14791785
you only need to train it once and if you don't keep it updated/keep improving it, training one model once would be pretty cheap when you amortize it over all calls and users for the foreseeable future

[Anonymous No.14791937]

>>14791833
a bit of natural selection will quickly affect this

[Anonymous No.14791939]

>>14791926
5 syllables per second at 3 letters each => 15 letters per second, so 120 bit per second using ascii
using the 4Mbps number from before that would be 33.333 calls at once
not bad desu, but you'll sound like one of these computer-generated youtube vids

[Anonymous No.14791953]

>>14791926
>>14791939
Put on top a system that can imitate the source voice pretty faithfully, but will completely decouple any inflections and shit, and you got a prime divorce generator.

[Anonymous No.14791965]

>>14791066
imagine the radioastronomy

[Anonymous No.14791987]

https://twitter.com/katlinegrey/status/1563088899995766784
wew

[Anonymous No.14791989]

>>14791987
And calling your projects after Greek gods is alarming since their civilization fell to Rome and got later Christianized. Yawn.

[Anonymous No.14791993]

>>14790908
you rang?

[Anonymous No.14791994]

>>14791987
forgetting Tsar bomba?

[Anonymous No.14792001]

>>14791989
they never should have messed with Jerusalem

[Anonymous No.14792010]

Never seen an /sfg/ thread so active in a while

[Anonymous No.14792012]

[Anonymous No.14792016]

>>14792012
What kind or retard designed this?
>unbalanced
>shit aerodynamics
>weird separate gunner cockpit

You'd get a better artillery-helicopter by just taking a tank and turning it upside down (which would still be retarded)

[Anonymous No.14792026]

>>14792010
It's because of the Starlink news. Prepare your anuses for Artemis I

[Anonymous No.14792029]

Drax did nothing wrong

[Anonymous No.14792063]

The seventh section of the Starship tower at LC-39A is being lifted

[Anonymous No.14792066]

they're gonna be catching falcons with the arm aren't they

[Anonymous No.14792071]

>>14792066
Seeing as they barely land falcon back on land and by the time the tower is finished in Florida it Starship should be flying I very much doubt it. Especially since the catcher is specifically built for Starship's diameter.

[Anonymous No.14792083]

>>14791994
Tsar Bomba was tested with the 3rd stage missing
it wasn't complete

[Anonymous No.14792099]

[Anonymous No.14792118]

>>14792083
either way EMBARASSING to forget the most infamous Tsar project

[Anonymous No.14792124]

>>14792118
yeah, but the joke wouldn't be as well paced

[Anonymous No.14792134]

[Anonymous No.14792147]

It's time
>>14792145
>>14792145
>>14792145

[Anonymous No.14792148]

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/08/forget-5g-wireless-spacex-and-t-mobile-want-to-offer-zero-g-coverage/

[Anonymous No.14792267]

>>14791815
>he doesn't know about the gainz trainz

[Anonymous No.14792277]

I'm an hour away from Cape Canaveral. I'll be seeing both lunches in the next few days up close.

[Anonymous No.14792593]

>>14791606
Earth may have had life even earlier in its history, but since we're much more geologically active most of our sedimentary rocks have already been subducted and recycled or metamorphosed beyond recognition or eroded or otherwise destroyed. Meanwhile on Mars, if some bed of stromatolites was buried under fine sediments from a river washing into a shallow sea and fossilized, those fossils would have just sat there for billions of years. Apart from the odd impact event destroying a comparably tiny portion of geologic historical record, Mars should have a very pristine subsurface. Also, Mars had conditions supporting liquid water for the first ~2.5 billion years of its history, so if life on Mars took as long to form as Earth life, then advanced as fast as Earth life did, then we should be able to find clear fossil evidence of it today.
To put that into perspective, two billion years ago on Earth the great oxygenation event was happening, which formed enormous banded iron deposits which we mine up today as a decent iron ore. Also, this event in Earth's history led immediately into the Huronian glaciation event, which was an intense global ice age. If we want to find evidence of past life on Mars, we should be looking for stromatolite-analog fossils, banded iron deposits, and evidence of a sudden extreme climate shift from warm to frozen occurring some time between Mars' formation and ~2 billion years ago ("sudden" being the important part, a 500 million year cooling of the climate probably has nothing to do with biological activity).
Better get at least a few thousand men on Mars with their shovels and preferably their wives.

[Anonymous No.14792617]

>>14791709
The reason I'm excited for Starship is because on top of making Moon and Mars human exploration feasible, it will also greatly reduce the cost and complexity of getting probes out to their destinations while simultaneously allowing for much larger and more capable probes than anything we've ever sent anywhere before.