/sfg/ - Space Flight General

[Anonymous No.14815580]

Let's fucking try again edition
Previous: >>14813062

[Anonymous No.14815585]

It's over.

[Anonymous No.14815586]

[Anonymous No.14815590]

Doubles and SLS blows up at the launchpad

[Anonymous No.14815596]

musk is finished

[Anonymous No.14815600]

>>14815596

[Anonymous No.14815603]

>>14815586
the amount of pipes on that nozzle

[Anonymous No.14815619]

>>14815585
/sfg/ please tell me there's a way to sugarcoat this

[Anonymous No.14815624]

>>14815586
>Rocket patina is now a thing
Classic car boner

[Anonymous No.14815632]

>>14815585
apparently the engine that failed to ignite on the booster too was removed. I am in serious doubt about the reliability of those engines

[Anonymous No.14815636]

>>14815586
NOOOOO YOU CAN'T JUST ADD A NOZZLE EXTENSION AND CALL THAT THE VACUUM RAPTOR REEEEE

[Anonymous No.14815640]

Pasting from old thread:
Can someone give me the qrd on Chinese reusable vehicle progress? I know they have that Grasshopper copy, but what's the status of the Falcon and Starship clones?

[Anonymous No.14815642]

>>14815640
They were recently testing the engine for a rocket called ZQ-2

[Anonymous No.14815643]

>>14815640
2030s

[Anonymous No.14815656]

>>14815580
it looks much more streamlined and aero than Saturn V. Bet it carries much more payload to the Moon

[Anonymous No.14815661]

>>14815580
>>14815656
The thing I hate most about it is the escape tower.
Compare it to this.

[Anonymous No.14815665]

Wooo! Only 24 hours until scrub!

[Anonymous No.14815666]

>>14815656
>Bet it carries much more payload to the Moon
Yeah about that.

[Anonymous No.14815668]

>>14815661
I know escape towers are costly and old but I still think they're neat

[Anonymous No.14815669]

>>14815636
Nozzle extension aside, that's a different bell entirely. Much wider.

[Anonymous No.14815686]

What are the odds that dearMoon happens before Artemis or CNSA do a crewed moon orbit mission?
SLS doesn't give me high hopes, but Starship still needs to get flying and crew rated.

[Anonymous No.14815689]

>>14815668
I mean yeah it's neat. The SRBs are neat and the Shuttle was super neat too.
In the end it's just so sad to see the terrible mediocrity, our space ambitions effectively rewound by 50 years.
I would never hate it, I would appreciate it only if it weren't the state of the art.

[Anonymous No.14815693]

Reddit tier retards

Space is fake and gay.

[Anonymous No.14815696]

https://nitter.net/Grimezsz/status/1565165033780281346#m

Based X

[Anonymous No.14815703]

>>14815693
wtf i didn't type that

[Anonymous No.14815704]

>>14815693
your mom is fake and gay

[Anonymous No.14815706]

>>14815703
nvm i'm retarted lmao

[Anonymous No.14815711]

>>14815661
>he doesn't find an old style tractor launch escape towers to be peak rocket aesthetics
There's no hope for you friend

[Anonymous No.14815714]

>>14815696
fuck the rocket equation

[Anonymous No.14815719]

>>14815696
>>14815714
lmao, future emperor of mars everyone

[Anonymous No.14815730]

>>14815661
I actually think the escape tower is simpler and cheaper.

[Anonymous No.14815733]

>>14815642
ZQ-2 is that one Chinese methalox rocket that may or may not be close to flying. 4 first stage engines (questionable for reuse) and 4 tons to LEO. Not really a big deal.

[Anonymous No.14815740]

Starship is not flying this year

[Anonymous No.14815741]

>>14815714
Elon's genes are too powerful for this planet

[Anonymous No.14815744]

>>14815740
True, no matter when you read it

[Anonymous No.14815756]

>>14815714
she should give him those solid rocket boosters used for model rocks. Let him light that shit indoors and observe their power

[Anonymous No.14815757]

>>14815741
Elon's genes are too autistic for this planet

[Anonymous No.14815768]

>>14815686
Polaris 3 is probably going to happen before dear moon and that needs a crew rated starship.
Doesn't the crew artemis SLS need a whole new launch tower? That is probably going to take like 5 years, so I guess there is a real possibility of dearMoon happening before crewed SLS

[Anonymous No.14815771]

>>14815693
you are adopted, your mom told me yesterday when we were fucking

[Anonymous No.14815777]

[Anonymous No.14815778]

>>14815580
Spare Parts System will never work. LMK when the Starship is up and running.

[Anonymous No.14815786]

>>14815768
But isn't Polaris just Earth Orbit missions?
dearMoon is a moon mission, which is in a whole other level

[Anonymous No.14815789]

[Anonymous No.14815790]

>>14815714
That kid sounds pretty smart if he can articulate statements like that at two years old

[Anonymous No.14815797]

>>14815714
Dangerously based

[Anonymous No.14815798]

>>14815786
is it really? if you can loiter in earth orbit for like a week, going around the moon shouldnt be an additional problem from a lifesupport standpoint
you just need orbitel refilling

[Anonymous No.14815803]

>>14815790
yeah thought the same, normally I wouldn't believe if someone told that their 2 year old talked like that, but not as surprising for elons kid

[Anonymous No.14815808]

but he used the f-word

[Anonymous No.14815811]

>>14815790
>>14815803
you guys have never spoken to a 2 year old

[Anonymous No.14815817]

>>14815811
I have a 2yo nephew and he can't speak very much yet. Of course that kid might be closer to three, my nephew only turned two recently. Don't know how much my niece was speaking at that age since I didn't see her much back then, she's turning four soon

[Anonymous No.14815821]

>>14815714
Get the little guy a multistage rocket toy that comes apart and snaps back together, he can play out whole missions and restacking in the VAB. I know such toys exist, at least ones for the Saturn V.

[Anonymous No.14815823]

>>14815811
Not all children are created equal friend. Some become articulate very quickly while others take longer to become coherent
>t. has a few toddler aged nieces and nephews

[Anonymous No.14815826]

>>14815817
Then again she was a pretty adept speaker when I started seeing her when she had turned three, so yeah I suppose it's reasonable if the tweet kid is close to three

[Anonymous No.14815832]

>>14815811
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcepkHkoLjU
https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/infant-and-toddler-health/expert-answers/toddler-speech-development/faq-20057847
I mean, they seem to understand like 2 separate things and string them together at most
here you have a swear word in the right context, rocket and "too heavy", which is like 2 concepts

maybe grimez is adding something lol

[Anonymous No.14815843]

>>14815832
Yeah I don't think the first statement is too weird, but the part where she talks about the kid accusing her of trickery seems like a more advanced concept. Then again she isn't paraphrasing how he actually said it, so it might just sound fancier when she's retelling the event

[Anonymous No.14815844]

>>14815580
FTS Archive
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KCJBL632oieD1r6JOh_5Eg9NTcf_-hH8?usp=sharing

23 new stamps from Romania, 1963-1969
Surprisingly many stamps on Apollo and American astronauts
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1cOsrVo-oeeFMDslwMqCpeyskFa4_kPn5?usp=sharing

[Anonymous No.14815849]

no launch thread? like SLS or not, this is one of the most important launches of this era of spaceflight. first SLS launch, first artemis launch, first major lunar mission for NASA in decades, etc.
this is a big one

[Anonymous No.14815852]

>>14815849
Isn't it still like 24 hours for it, or twelve or whatever

[Anonymous No.14815858]

>>14815849
its gonna be another scrub nigga

[Anonymous No.14815859]

>>14815852
oh, i thought they rescheduled it to today. guess they pushed it back again

[Anonymous No.14815860]

>>14815849
i schleep

[Anonymous No.14815861]

WE
ARE
G-O-I-N-G

[Anonymous No.14815863]

>>14815849
>no launch thread?
>already had one
>it's t-one day
you have to return to twitter

[Anonymous No.14815867]

Yeah

[Anonymous No.14815868]

>>14815859
I was under the impression that it was always going to be Saturday

[Anonymous No.14815875]

>>14815867
>force
>seconds
what the fuck

[Anonymous No.14815878]

>>14815867
This "solid metallic hydrogen" stuff sounds great. What's the cost/kilogram?

[Anonymous No.14815882]

>>14815878
It can't be made at all at tank pressures in fact.

[Anonymous No.14815883]

>>14815878
Yes.

[Anonymous No.14815885]

>>14815580
SLS is real. This is it. Tomorrow we are going

[Anonymous No.14815887]

>President Lyndon Johnson described the launch (Apollo 4), "The whole world could see the awesome sight of the first launch of what is now the largest rocket ever flown. This launching symbolizes the power this nation is harnessing for the peaceful exploration of space."
What will current president say?

[Anonymous No.14815888]

https://asiatimes.com/2022/09/us-china-in-a-heated-tit-for-tat-moon-race/
based

[Anonymous No.14815895]

>>14815888
>china
stopped
reading
right
there

[Anonymous No.14815897]

>>14815887
most powerful rocket ever, blah blah blah, first black woman on the moon, America is still great, etc. etc.

[Anonymous No.14815899]

>>14815887
>"Ashitraymenatables"

[Anonymous No.14815901]

Was there a hidden swastika somewhere on the lunar module?

[Anonymous No.14815903]

>>14815600
Humanity is overrated

[Anonymous No.14815904]

>>14815887
probably something based

[Anonymous No.14815905]

>>14815887
>Every single morning since I've been 27 years old, I've got up and someone's handed me a card like the one I have in my pocket with the schedule on it, of all the things I'm gonna do. I don't know what to do if I didn't have that card.

[Anonymous No.14815907]

>>14815904
Based on what?

[Anonymous No.14815911]

ugh...

[Anonymous No.14815913]

>>14815907
Based on joe.

[Anonymous No.14815918]

>>14815768
>>14815786
Doesn't actually have to be crew rated, only has to be crew rated to fly NASA astronauts.

[Anonymous No.14815925]

>>14815693
Ok /x/edditor, explain to me what I was observing when I recorded the orbit of Jupiter's moons and rotation of the planet with a time-lapse? Explain to me why when I recorded the shadows on the craters of the moon from day to day they would change and be clearly influenced by 3dimensional topography.

[Anonymous No.14815927]

dude we can't replicate the F-1 engine, the technology has been lost

[Anonymous No.14815930]

>>14815744
ok shill, have fun crying when artemis 1 explodes on the launch pad

[Anonymous No.14815933]

>>14815927
worst space meme

[Anonymous No.14815936]

>>14815925
Lights in the sky.

You think the moon is solid? Fucking IDIOT

[Anonymous No.14815939]

>>14815927
the technology hasn't been lost, the tooling has been.

[Anonymous No.14815940]

>>14815927

[Anonymous No.14815943]

>>14815936
Lol, so I'm supposed to believe they are lights in the sky when I clearly saw shadows being casted by them (in the case of Jupiter's moons) and on them? Why should I believe some faggot shill on 4chan over my own eyes?

[Anonymous No.14815944]

>>14815696
>>14815714
Who is this suppose to be?

[Anonymous No.14815947]

>>14815940
bet the contractor would find a way to make the new engine cost 5 times more

[Anonymous No.14815948]

>>14815944
Elon Musk's incubator

[Anonymous No.14815951]

>>14815867
>metallic hydrogen SRB

That doesnt sound too safe

[Anonymous No.14815967]

>>14815951
tough times call for bold measures

[Anonymous No.14815969]

>>14815951
Metallic hydrogen requires some absurd science voodoo to create, let alone store as a propellant. You'd be much better off using something reasonable like metastable monatomic hydrogen.

[Anonymous No.14815973]

>>14815951
IIRC metallic hydrogen is only metastable so you'd use pellets and laser ignition.

[Anonymous No.14815976]

>>14815887
>uuhmmhuh
>This is uh... the ...
>*looks at notes*
>*accidentally reads wrong part and stands up*
>I remember looking at the Saturn VI rocket back in 1978... uh...
>taking our brave men of our great nation, and uh...
>*notices a squirrel somewhere*
>*starts walking away to somewhere off-camera*
>cuts away to someone else

[Anonymous No.14815978]

>>14815976
>turns around and tries to shake hands with a flag

[Anonymous No.14815984]

>>14815867
Wouldn't metallic hydrogen effectively vaporize any engine it went through? It would burn way above the melting point of even tungsten probably.

[Anonymous No.14815990]

>>14815984
retard

[Anonymous No.14815994]

>>14815936
Listen here schizo
If you say that something can be explained by some kind of illusion without providing any decent evidence, then everything can be explained as an illusion.
If you wanna argue then bring something that we can test.

[Anonymous No.14815995]

>>14815990
Nice answer
>b-but just mix it with liquid hydrogen to cool it!
Not getting 1700s then

[Anonymous No.14815996]

>>14815927
reddit moment

[Anonymous No.14816008]

>>14815867
>midwit sees number
>midwit plugs in bigger number
>midwit pauses for applause

[Anonymous No.14816009]

>>14815995
>what is a cooled chamber

[Anonymous No.14816018]

>>14816009
>>14816009
>cooled chamber for 6000K
LMAO, retard

[Anonymous No.14816019]

>>14815887
Fuck that pic is so kino.

[Anonymous No.14816023]

>>14815832
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_sJAEhdCg8

The difference between 2 and 2.5 is staggering. Rapid attention capability is achieved.

[Anonymous No.14816025]

>>14816018
>t. cant into thermodynamics

[Anonymous No.14816026]

lol

[Anonymous No.14816030]

>>14815887
so why did they build the crawler in the first place?
you could put saturn v on a platform with 4 mammoet spmts.

[Anonymous No.14816035]

>>14815580
Dubs and sls explodes just after srb staging

[Anonymous No.14816037]

>>14816026
How disgusting

[Anonymous No.14816045]

>>14816035
Re roll for fts malfunction

[Anonymous No.14816047]

>>14816035
Pop during fueling

[Anonymous No.14816048]

>>14816026
incredibly based

[Anonymous No.14816051]

>>14815757
Starship is his way home

[Anonymous No.14816055]

>>14816026
Based and cringe.

[Anonymous No.14816059]

>>14816019
Everything about Apollo is kino

[Anonymous No.14816062]

>>14815786
>dearMoon
> those crappy tiles can take lunar reentry speed
oh no no no

[Anonymous No.14816064]

>>14816059
The film cooling is insane. Haven't seen anything like it.

[Anonymous No.14816099]

is it feasible to send an F9 booster to follow SLS and record it and then RTLS. We only ever get good footage while the rocket is still near the ground

[Anonymous No.14816127]

>>14816099
It's going to be NASA's most important launch in decades and you just know they'll fuck up with the video setup

[Anonymous No.14816131]

>>14815898
Because we haven't had anything for a year.

[Anonymous No.14816140]

https://www.nbcnews.com/specials/failure-to-launch/index.html

[Anonymous No.14816141]

>>14816026
Owner operators always have the best decorations on their trailers

[Anonymous No.14816165]

R A C E F O R T H E B A S E
https://spacenews.com/nasa-and-china-are-eyeing-the-same-landing-sites-near-the-lunar-south-pole/

>NASA earlier this month announced the selection of 13 potential locations for the Artemis 3 crewed mission which is currently scheduled to launch in late 2025.

>NASA candidate landing sites, each about 15 by 15 kilometers, are located within six degrees of latitude of the south pole.

>Meanwhile, a Chinese journal article on potential lunar south pole landing sites, authored by Chang’e-4 lunar mission commander Zhang He and others, identifies 10 suitable spots near the lunar south pole. The sites are thought to be related to the country’s Chang’e-7 mission, currently scheduled for 2024.

[Anonymous No.14816169]

>>14816059
wrong

[Anonymous No.14816172]

>>14816165
I hate the chinese government but I want them to do something big so much
>Bring back the space race please

[Anonymous No.14816188]

>Brevard County officials are expecting a huge crowd — perhaps double what they saw on Monday, at 200,000 to 400,000 strong, the Orlando Sentinel reported Thursday (opens in new tab) (Sept. 1). And other Space Coast officials concur with that estimate.

Getting closer to a typical Shuttle launch crowd

[Anonymous No.14816191]

>>14816165
>>NASA earlier this month announced the selection of (((13))) potential locations for the Artemis (((3))) crewed mission which is currently scheduled to launch in late (((2025))).
>>NASA candidate landing sites, each about {{{(((15))) by (((15)))}}} kilometers, are located within [[[six]]] degrees of latitude of the south pole.
>>Meanwhile, a Chinese journal article on potential lunar south pole landing sites, authored by Chang’e-(((4))) lunar mission commander Zhang He and others, identifies (((10))) suitable spots near the lunar south pole. The sites are thought to be related to the country’s Chang’e-(((7))) mission, currently scheduled for (((2024))).

[Anonymous No.14816193]

>>14816131
Except we've had a ton of progress, it just hasn't been as visually interesting. R2 for example is far superior to R1 and the production rate is far higher. The progress made with the OLP and launch site infrastructure has also been huge. /sfg/ of all places should know that just because shit isn't happening out in the open doesn't mean stuff isn't getting done.

[Anonymous No.14816198]

>>14816165
The United States should put 10 million Americans on the Moon just to deny the land to anyone else.

[Anonymous No.14816204]

ISRU bros we're eating good

>In a study published today in the journal Science Advances, researchers report that, by the end of 2021, MOXIE was able to produce oxygen on seven experimental runs, in a variety of atmospheric conditions, including during the day and night, and through different Martian seasons. In each run, the instrument reached its target of producing six grams of oxygen per hour — about the rate of a modest tree on Earth.

[Anonymous No.14816207]

How is the moon landing denial gonna be this time?
Are they going to watch it live while trying to search for evidence of fakery?
Is this just going to be another retarded cultural war?

[Anonymous No.14816211]

>>14816207
The level of trust in the government is so low that if it told people that water is necessary for their survival there would be people challenging that claim

[Anonymous No.14816214]

>>14816198
make it 100 million, life support optional

[Anonymous No.14816215]

>>14816207
it's very simple anon-any observation that attacks their PoV must be fake. Even if the chinese take pics of the distant remnants of the apollo sites, and later tourists can easily observe rocks and surface features that exactly match what the astros photographed on the moon, it's all just simulation. and god forbid they ever make accessing the moon easy and cheap, because then they'll pivot to saying a vast secret crew of artists went ot the moon's surface to meiiculously alter it to look just like the photos, involving the engineering of millions of tons of rock using satanic magic or something.
these people have unfalsifiable views of reality-anything you cite will be warped around their delusion to fit their conclusions. it's like arguing with flat earthers-just ignore them.

[Anonymous No.14816216]

>>14816165
they will also return a Mars sample before US

[Anonymous No.14816217]

>>14816214
We need those hundred million for Mars.

[Anonymous No.14816219]

>>14816211
i mean technically you can get away with never drinknig anything if you eat a lot of cucumbers or watermelon, but i feel you

[Anonymous No.14816221]

>>14816193
>R2 for example is far superior to R1
both seem to be unreliable, R2 shut down during the most recent static.
> the production rate is far higher
You have to take Elon's word for this. You might as well could have believed him when he said the first cargo ships would land in Mars in 2020

[Anonymous No.14816223]

>>14816211
>>14816215
There is a detail though: there is a chance the first Artemis landing will happen during a Republican presidency, how would that affect the dynamics of it?

[Anonymous No.14816226]

>>14816207
Moon landing denial relies on a massive international conspiracy already. You can find Chinese state media articles that mock the idea, to say nothing of the Soviet Union. CGI and whatnot has improved far more than camera technology so from a conspiratorial perspective it isn't really new evidence so the most logically consistent perspective is to believe both or neither. That's all to say that the conspiracy theorists who are convinced by it will be stupider on average than the ones who dismiss it as a new hoax.

[Anonymous No.14816229]

>>14816026
was just reading about those 2 techs asphyxiating during a nitrogen purge prepping STS-1

[Anonymous No.14816245]

>>14816026
Dangerously based

[Anonymous No.14816250]

>>14816223
None

NASA is about as politically agnostic in the patronage sense as it gets

[Anonymous No.14816253]

>>14816223
It didn't affect it the first time that much.

[Anonymous No.14816271]

>>14816229
Nvm, it was 3; third had severe brain damage and died years later :(.
Good reminder Wired journos suck.

[Anonymous No.14816280]

>>14816223
Artemis is Trump's baby. Totally fine.

[Anonymous No.14816285]

Can they just fucking launch the faggot already so I can watch it RUD into a million pieces

[Anonymous No.14816294]

>>14816221
>You have to take Elon's word for this. You might as well could have believed him when he said the first cargo ships would land in Mars in 2020
But he's not talking about something happening in the future, he's talking about something that actually happened. There is a difference between being wrong about when something will occur and saying something is currently happening.
>both seem to be unreliable, R2 shut down during the most recent static.
R2 is still a very in-dev engine, but its statistics are far better then R1. it has much more thrust and weighs a lot less.

Your argument seems to be that elon and spacex are all secretly lying to us. You're not that different from CSS and thunderf00t in that regard.

[Anonymous No.14816304]

>>14816280
So was the vaccine, which everyone seems to forget now. Although space exploration is stunningly bipartisan now because China's getting uppity.

[Anonymous No.14816309]

>>14816304
Ehh, not to get too political, but there's a good number of Democrats who feel the space budget should be used for other domestic spending.

[Anonymous No.14816311]

>>14816304
>Although space exploration is stunningly bipartisan now because China's getting uppity.
/sfg/ was completely correct about that.

[Anonymous No.14816315]

>nobody gave a shit about the chinese spacewalk
>nobody gave a shit about the iss spacewalk
space is dead for the average person

[Anonymous No.14816318]

>>14816315
LEO spacewalks from government capsules or government tin can stations are literally grandpa tier technology now. We need novelty to be excited. Reusability, going beyond LEO, spin gravity, commercial stations, new major interplanetary missions, JWST, those are all exciting.

[Anonymous No.14816319]

>>14815984
It’s just hydrogen. That’s like saying liquid or chilled kerosene burns hotter.
The advantage of metallic hydrogen is being much denser and easier to work with.
Refer to >>14815990 for more info.

[Anonymous No.14816322]

>>14816315
It is dead since after Apollo 11, almost no one cares because it isn't like movies.
Musk managed to capture some people's attention with his mars shlock, but it's still mostly entusiasts.

[Anonymous No.14816325]

>>14815585
Why is no one talking about this?

[Anonymous No.14816326]

>>14816325
its no big deal

[Anonymous No.14816327]

>>14816325
All the time there are people claiming doom and gloom because of a random Starship development issue, forgetting all the times their stuff had to burst in flames before having success.

[Anonymous No.14816328]

>>14816309
We're talking about a victory with great optics that both political parties will get behind, not anything relating to funding. A few of the faux-socialist millennials might make some "but starving children :( [unintelligible] climate change!" posts but they're equally likely to do "strong women aha!" posts and it won't effect jack shit.

[Anonymous No.14816332]

>>14816325
>Test engines swapped out on test rocket

Stop the presses this is huge news

[Anonymous No.14816344]

>>14815693
I see you anti space scum. Space is the destiny of man

[Anonymous No.14816351]

>>14816165
epic! I love kayfabe competitions! we must stop those darned commies haha!

>>14816198
amerishits can't even put one there and you talk MILLIONS lmao...

[Anonymous No.14816357]

>>14815661
>>14815711
Peak rockets aesthetics and peak brainlet filter. Ask a normie what they suppose those megaphone thingies on the "antenna" are for.

[Anonymous No.14816360]

>>14816315
wow nobody is paying attention to that thing that has happened 100s of times?

[Anonymous No.14816365]

>>14816351
Can you please expand on your views? Are you a flat Earther? Do you believe that space exists at all, or is there a dome or something? Do you think that the US government has built secret towers all around the globe to mimic a satellite network?

[Anonymous No.14816366]

>>14816328
Fair point.

[Anonymous No.14816371]

Why do so many people attack the Ares I LES but act like it will suddenly work for SLS? Aren’t TWO solid rocket boosters even more dangerous than one??

[Anonymous No.14816375]

>>14816365
the earth is obviously either flat or much larger than is officially stated

[Anonymous No.14816377]

>>14815901
maybe but it was hidden so I don't know :(

[Anonymous No.14816379]

>>14816375
Do you believe that space exists at all, or is there a dome or something? Do you think that the US government has built secret towers all around the globe to mimic a satellite network?

Do you believe in a massive international conspiracy dating back millennia to falsely claim the Earth is flat? Why do you think this is likely or possible?

[Anonymous No.14816388]

>>14816140
yeah there's literally nothing in Camden I don't know why it didn't take off (Elon didn't notice them)

[Anonymous No.14816392]

>>14816191
what did he mean by this

[Anonymous No.14816393]

>>14816392
I think he was trying some Latex markup and had a stroke

[Anonymous No.14816400]

[Anonymous No.14816402]

>>14816319
kerosene burns hotter if you heat it up ahead of time, which is basically what metallic hydrogen is
>>14816371
yes

[Anonymous No.14816403]

>>14816392
Something about numerology maybe. More likely just some weird misclicks something something Latex

[Anonymous No.14816407]

>>14815789
Why do I hear the NASASpaceFlight theme

[Anonymous No.14816415]

>>14816216
>they will also return a Mars sample before US
You know what would motivate the space race and maybe the comptition toward this epic achievement; Nasa and Chinese space agencys, attatch a fund to the : be the first to do these things before China: space department responsible for achieving those tasks; and be the core owner of a gambling pool, that people around the world can bet which nation will be the first to achieve;this or that monumental achievement, and the space agency takes a cut of maybe those millions, to use in their efforts

[Anonymous No.14816417]

>>14816415
That's basically you paying your taxes

The X-Prizes were ostensibly that but for private companies

[Anonymous No.14816421]

>>14816379
>Do you believe in a massive international conspiracy
yes

>Why do you think this is likely or possible
professional wrestling disproves all claims that "big" conspiracies can't work

[Anonymous No.14816425]

>>14816421
Professional wrestling isn't a conspiracy; it's more like reality TV. What that doesn't address is why every country in the world for centuries has conspired to promote a millennia old conspiracy theory that the Earth is round.

Yet again: Do you believe that space exists at all, or is there a dome or something? Do you think that the US government has built secret towers all around the globe [sic] to mimic a satellite network?

[Anonymous No.14816431]

>>14816415
You can just do this with normal prediction markets. If there's a market for "insert organization you work for here" landing on the moon first, and you don't bet on yourself, you're such a gigantic fucking cuck that you don't deserve any money.

Illegal in America because the CFTC is gay.

[Anonymous No.14816432]

>>14816425
>Professional wrestling isn't a conspiracy; it's more like reality TV
"Reality TV" is a conspiracy. Of course "everyone knows" it's fake, but millions of people still watch it and think it's real.
>satellites
You don't really need satellites for anything, google maps etc. uses aerial photography and communications go over undersea cables and radio towers

[Anonymous No.14816435]

>>14816417
Yeah but any money helps in the effort and a gambling pool on if China or US gets a mars sample back first, and seperate bet gets a man on Mars first, each country auto gets slots if their side wins the bet, and as entry fee donation for the effort what have you recieves a percentage of the pot to use for building efforts to win the bet

[Anonymous No.14816446]

>>14816432
That doesn't address satellite phones or GPS being available with a clear connection even in extremely remote areas.

Do you really think a massive global conspiracy dating back millennia is more likely than (You) being wrong? It's not just some government coverup; you need to explain everyone from Plato to Hitler being in on this.

[Anonymous No.14816447]

>>14816207
Augmented reality, holograms, fake videos/cgi, movie sets. There's a possibility some will accept that the Artemis moon landings are real, but still deny the Apollo missions because of modern technology or whatever excuse they come up with.

[Anonymous No.14816448]

>>14816431
>Yes, I am willing to bet $12,974.34 that my organization "Walgreens" will land on the Moon first.

[Anonymous No.14816452]

>>14816448
You work at Walgreens?

[Anonymous No.14816453]

are you guys really still getting baited by flat earthers. You know most of them don't even believe this stuff, they are just (you) fishing.

[Anonymous No.14816454]

>>14816431
If people bet millions on sports, surely rocket scientests/the nations top cutting edge science Vs China, should get some mechanism of recieving a few extra million for their efforts, and the hope of millions more of they win.

[Anonymous No.14816457]

>>14816452
No but I thought it would sound funny

[Anonymous No.14816465]

>>14816454
Why? If they want to bet on themselves they can, they're compensated for their work through their salaries.

[Anonymous No.14816472]

>>14816454
Are you the same guy who suggested turning Mars into a casino? You might have a gambling problem.

[Anonymous No.14816478]

>>14816447
Apollo was real but Artemis is a hoax to cover the embezzlement of billions of dollars by the military industrial complex. The Constellation program was begun late in George W Bush's first term when questions about the mishandling of funds during the War on Terror were becoming unavoidable (The War on Terror was begun in part to help hide of the trillion dollars that the Pentagon's forensic accountants had announced as "missing" on Sept. 10th, 2001). The Constellation program successfully laundered hundreds of billions of dollars of MIA tax dollars into a form that the general public wouldn't object to, but it had to be canceled once it was apparent that the stated goals of the cover story were too ambitious. Artemis is an ongoing extension of this highly successful program. SLS only costs about $300M per launch, but the price is driven upwards into the multi-billion dollar range by the need to provide accounting cover for black military projects and globalist secret society welfare programs undertaken by the MIC.

[Anonymous No.14816480]

>>14816059
If only it was fully reusable.

[Anonymous No.14816489]

>>14816478
What saddens me about conspiracy schizos is that things can be real AND exploited at the same time.
9/11 was exploited as an excuse to get oil but it still was a terrorist attack.
Covid was exploited as an excuse to fill the pockets of the medical industry but it still was a real disease.
The SLS is a jobs program but it still is a (crappy) moon rocket.

[Anonymous No.14816491]

>>14816478
>Apollo was real but Artemis is a hoax
stage 3: bargaining

[Anonymous No.14816509]

>>14816489
most of those schizos aren't real schizos, but are well poisoners or bots
their job is to be retarded on purpose, then viciously cling to [insert thing here] to discredit it and make it seem like a den of schizos too
you can then call up one of your media buddies to do an interview with your hired schizo, and they can reach new levels of retarded on live TV for the normies to see, ensuring whatever it was you didn't like is smothered in disgrace forever

[Anonymous No.14816519]

>>14816489
>>14816509
Damn, tell me more about the large shadow organization that's behind conspiracy theorists anon.

[Anonymous No.14816523]

in honor of raptor shitting itswlf, i had diahrea today :)

[Anonymous No.14816539]

>>14816523
I feel you. Crunchy flaming hot Cheetos are good, but they are not kind. I'm thinking that not picking up a jumbo sized bag for the big scrub tomorrow was probably the right call.

[Anonymous No.14816545]

>>14816519
That's another reason why conspiracy theorists are retarded:
>There is no fucking global shadow organization, it's all smaller groups usually against each other;
>The conspiracies are much simpler than they think, it's just removing enemies, getting money/power and propaganda;
>They screw the chances of actual shady stuff getting public attention, the same way activists screw their own causes.
The Americas military isn't hiding aliens in their bases, it's just secret military technology development.
(All I said also applies to marxists/communists, they're just academically accepted schizophrenia right now)

[Anonymous No.14816555]

>>14816519
The head of the organization's identity was very hard to find. It took many years but I finally figured out Candlejack is behind it all. Turns out he was hiding in plain si

[Anonymous No.14816560]

>>14816545
>They screw the chances of actual shady stuff getting public attention, the same way activists screw their own causes.
The term "conspiracy theory" was cooked up by the CIA to generate cover for the shady things they were up to at the time. The most viral conspiracy theories are all dreamed up, seeded, and actively encouraged by the same groups they're supposed to be about. Pizzagate was false, but it was also very effective at poisoning discussion about the fact that there's a large group of politically influential pedophiles in the US government.

[Anonymous No.14816572]

>>14816519
It's literally the CIA.

[Anonymous No.14816573]

elon said going to mars will cost as much as a house, but what about the moon?

[Anonymous No.14816577]

satellitemap.space

Even with just v1s and v1.5s, they've almost covered everything.

[Anonymous No.14816580]

Dubs and the orange tank explodes.

[Anonymous No.14816590]

>>14816400
>Not Stratolaunch
Disappoint

[Anonymous No.14816593]

>>14816590
Is that ever actually going to launch something, or are they just going to keep rolling it out for a biannual NSF testing griftstream?

[Anonymous No.14816596]

>>14816539
i bought gold fish crackers because orange roggit

[Anonymous No.14816598]

WE

[Anonymous No.14816612]

Will this be streamed? I wanna see this fly, but I feel like the most info we'll get is the founder making a post on linkedin days after the fact.

[Anonymous No.14816613]

>>14816598
My o-rings are bursting with excitement

[Anonymous No.14816620]

>>14816612
For now the best we have is their recently updated twitter
https://twitter.com/ablspacesystems

[Anonymous No.14816629]

>>14816612
lockheed martin doesnt give a shit about what you want

[Anonymous No.14816632]

>>14816620
>two tweets over 5 years, one of which is just "Launching..."
Funniest twitter account I've seen in ages

[Anonymous No.14816634]

>>14816598
are going to witness a disaster

[Anonymous No.14816641]

>>14816634
We already witnessed a disaster with the funding of SLS

[Anonymous No.14816648]

>>14816634
The largest rocketry explosion of our generation

[Anonymous No.14816650]

>>14815661
I prefer escape towers actually... If any one of the four Super Dracos don't start or blow up you're fucked. Whereas the escape tower is just a solid rocket motor. It has a guidance system but even if it fails you're still getting pulled away from the rocket no matter what.

[Anonymous No.14816654]

>>14816650
I think they look neat too.

[Anonymous No.14816659]

>>14816648
It IS going to be the largest rocket to fly since the last Saturn V launched Skylab back in 1973.

[Anonymous No.14816666]

>>14816612
based spook rocket. I'm sure there will be published video at least

[Anonymous No.14816670]

>>14816659
Briefly.

[Anonymous No.14816677]

>>14816632
Don't forget the youtube channel, which they only started after their test stand boom gave them more publicity than anything their PR mustered up to that point
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCl3YLwOlwGkBjkBQkNb4hAw

[Anonymous No.14816679]

Should I get some wine for the launch attempt?

[Anonymous No.14816682]

>>14816634

[Anonymous No.14816685]

>Yet again I'll watch the stream and it will be another scrub instead of success or catastrophic failure
NASA keeps making me waste my time like during the JWST Biden reveal
At least this time I have to wake up early

[Anonymous No.14816688]

>>14816685
*I don't have to wake up early

[Anonymous No.14816700]

>>14816679
god i love that game
might have had absolutely nothing in it to do but it's visuals and theme are extremely kino
so sad that they didn't pack the world to the brim with stuff to do

[Anonymous No.14816720]

>>14815904

>this rocket represents America. Way over budget and no longer white.

[Anonymous No.14816732]

I know nothing about Spaceflight or physics or orbital mechanics, or really anything for that matter. But say that you have a man and a woman, of reasonable fitness, in the blackness of space (no microgravity, no simulated gravity, just the middle of nowhere), and also presume that neither of them require a suit to survive the vacuum. To them the vacuum is as easy to occupy as Earth is. Now we must imagine that both of these individuals have decided to fight one another with nothing but tooth and nail and fist and kick. Would there be a marked difference in strength between the two or would their strength fail due to the lack of anything to push themselves off?

Basically, would a man in space be stronger than a woman - all other things being equal?

[Anonymous No.14816734]

>>14816732
Yeah

[Anonymous No.14816756]

https://youtu.be/vQ5GvoGhB1A

This is what i think of artemis

[Anonymous No.14816757]

>>14816756
>First post from this IP
>12 views
Fuck off

[Anonymous No.14816758]

how is ex-astraanon doing

[Anonymous No.14816766]

>>14816758
An heroed, I fear

[Anonymous No.14816783]

>>14816732
Yes he would still be stronger but the fight would be mostly grappling and they would try to cling to each other as much as possible. Even punch and kicks would not be the best idea because they could push themselves apart.

[Anonymous No.14816784]

>>14816766
>>14816758
Why was he fired?

[Anonymous No.14816797]

>>14816784
He quit

Also his RSUs were down like 90%

[Anonymous No.14816799]

>>14816784
>>14816797
Astra is probably getting delisted before the year is out. Astra won't exist in any regard by 2025

[Anonymous No.14816808]

Dubs, and sls launches flawlessly. Orion, however, fails the TLI burn

[Anonymous No.14816809]

>>14816808
/sfg/ is always wrong

[Anonymous No.14816810]

>>14816809
1-9 and sls explodes

[Anonymous No.14816813]

>>14816810
Like I said

[Anonymous No.14816814]

>>14816810

[Anonymous No.14816817]

https://spacenews.com/nasa-completes-agreement-with-axiom-space-for-second-private-astronaut-mission/

Space tourism, or, the astronaut commander's retirement plan

[Anonymous No.14816830]

>"We've got to show up, we've got to be ready and we've got to see what the day brings," Mike Sarafin, Nasa's Artemis mission manager, told reporters.
Already sounds defeated...

[Anonymous No.14816838]

>>14816830
More like exhausted

Didn't they spend like 36 hours nonstop working on the SLS prior to the first launch attempt?

[Anonymous No.14816862]

>>14816810
ebin

[Anonymous No.14816872]

>>14816590

[Anonymous No.14816890]

>>14816838
That sounds just like master chef where they every single time pretend to work on the dish right up to the last second.

[Anonymous No.14816893]

https://youtu.be/SVXPKz3GlYk

[Anonymous No.14816927]

>>14816872
>1600 AMRAAMs
fund it

[Anonymous No.14816929]

How do I automate inputs? I want to give it 100s of prompts and then check out the images later. I'm using Auto's fork btw
Variations like "A boy in xth century" where x keeps changing

[Anonymous No.14816931]

>>14816929
Stable diFfusion General?

[Anonymous No.14816938]

>>14816931
yes, sorry
/sfg/ is the only thing I visit on 4chan so my browser autofills it.
Started checking out the other generals, didn't realise /sfg/ is quite slow by 4chan standards.

[Anonymous No.14816946]

>>14815984
Yes it would. Thats the biggest problem apart from being completly theoretical. Itt malding for no reason.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMfPNUZzG_Q

[Anonymous No.14816981]

I was breast fed for 9 months via health white woman with DD breast and child baring hips. peak health, no alcohol, drugs or smoking. my IQ is in the range of 155-170.
artemis 1 has a 62.8% chance of exploding pre orbit.
enjoy. that is all.

[Anonymous No.14816993]

Right.

Doubles and the SLS explodes 5 meters off the launch padd, and the SRBs fly off into the VAB and audience.

[Anonymous No.14816995]

>>14816981
>only 9 months

[5'10 245lbs Mountain of a Man No.14817011]

>>14816732
Youre not as smart as you think you are.

[Anonymous No.14817027]

Starship again delay.
Bye guys.
Bye forever

[Anonymous No.14817030]

>>14817027
More than SLS?

[Anonymous No.14817035]

>>14817027
Bye :(

[Anonymous No.14817036]

Is everyone excited for tomorrow's launch?

[Anonymous No.14817039]

>>14817036
its gonna scrub again isn't it?

[Anonymous No.14817041]

when?

[Anonymous No.14817043]

>>14817036
launch starlink?

[Anonymous No.14817047]

>>14817041
In musks dreams only

[Anonymous No.14817050]

>>14817036
>guidance non-nominal
>range safeties failed
oh god its headed right for that cruise ship full of orphans

[Anonymous No.14817051]

>>14817050
At that inclination it isn't likely to hit much. 28 degrees misses both north and south Atlantic shipping lanes

I actually looked at a traffic plot yesterday just to see if anything was hanging out to salvage SLS debris

[Anonymous No.14817055]

>>14817051
SLS debris? Surely you can't be serious, this rocket will launch without a hitch! NASA is the best space agency in the world! Singles confirm!

[Anonymous No.14817056]

>>14817055
...checked?

[Anonymous No.14817070]

>>14817055
Oof

[Anonymous No.14817076]

>>14817055

[Anonymous No.14817079]

>>14817055

[Anonymous No.14817084]

>>14817055

[Anonymous No.14817089]

>>14817055
Obviously a major malfunction

[Anonymous No.14817090]

>>14817055
goodnight, irene

[Anonymous No.14817094]

>>14817055
WHAT HAVE YOU DONE

[Anonymous No.14817097]

Something will go wrong. It will be delayed another year.

[Anonymous No.14817105]

At this rate by the time the SLS finally gets to the moon it will already have been fully terraformed by SpaceX and populated with genetically engineered catgirls.

[Anonymous No.14817111]

>>14816407
Really? I hear the KSP VAB. The one with the tappy cymbals

[Anonymous No.14817115]

>>14817105
Starship isn't getting the loicense till sls launches

[Anonymous No.14817117]

>>14817055

[Anonymous No.14817121]

https://youtu.be/SVXPKz3GlYk
Badass rocket

[Anonymous No.14817125]

>put parachute on sls
>reuse it
>elon musk btfo

[Anonymous No.14817134]

>>14816573
it'll unironically cost more. no methane there, less resources, long nights.

[Anonymous No.14817135]

>>14817121
Wtf? PBS is actually being based and released a last minute exposé on oldspace filth?
Since when did a kid friendly media source become so high quality?

[Anonymous No.14817137]

>>14817135
thank mr O'Brien, he really called it the "senate launch system" directly to nelson's face (and blamed him)

[Anonymous No.14817168]

>>14817135
They also released this video that basically shat on Boing.
https://www.pbs.org/video/boeings-fatal-flaw-xenaq0/

[Anonymous No.14817185]

when can i cruise around space alone with a robot and an alien sidekick? all this shit is just filler until that point

[Anonymous No.14817204]

Holy shit we are finally going. We waited so long and now sls will finally launch and prove the muskrats wrong. So excited to see starshipsisters commit 41% because NASA will have flown a real rocket while SpaceX will be stuck on the ground doing nothing.
Starship will never be a real rocket, its over. Nasa wins again, time for 50 more years of stagnant technology!

[Anonymous No.14817205]

>Luna 1 was 1.2 meters in diameter and weighed 361 kilos
>Pioneer 4 was 51x23 cm and weighed 6.1 kilos
I never realized they were that different

[Anonymous No.14817208]

Rolling for RUD

[Anonymous No.14817221]

Doubles for everything goes smoothly and the mission is a total success.

[Anonymous No.14817249]

>>14817208
>>14817221
I predict that the launch will gone fine but some obscure valve will get stuck in orbit and the mission has to be cut short. NASA will then say that the mission was a complete success and that they have gathered lots of useful information

[Anonymous No.14817258]

>>14817055
>thunderchads I...

[Anonymous No.14817263]

>>14817249
Wouldn't be the first, second, or probably third time desu

[Anonymous No.14817264]

>>14816560
>Pizzagate was false, but it was also very effective at poisoning discussion about the fact that there's a large group of politically influential pedophiles in the US government.

No Pizzagate was to distract you from the fact pizza shops are real.

[Anonymous No.14817273]

ARTEMIS IN 5 BONGS! EVERYONNE CHANNEL YOUR ENERGY INTO THE O RINGS!

[Anonymous No.14817274]

>>14815580
>mfw Artemis just crashlands on the moon and sits there throwing off sparks and smoke

[Anonymous No.14817286]

>>14816059
of course it is because it was made by nazi

[Anonymous No.14817287]

is the rocket having another fucking leak?

[Anonymous No.14817295]

>>14817287
https://twitter.com/NASAGroundSys/status/1566024578064941056
>Teams have stopped flowing liquid hydrogen into the @NASA_SLS rocket, as a leak has been detected in the engine cavity. Teams are troubleshooting by warming up the area. Standby for updates.

[Anonymous No.14817297]

>>14817287
If the tranime illustrator doesnt take this idea of sls being a notoriously frequent "leaker," his title of offtopic thread schizo is revoked.

[Anonymous No.14817298]

>>14817287
>implying they fixed the leak
kek it was at the pad for 4 days they didn't fix shit. nasa doesnt do the cherrypicker to the access hatch kinda thing.

[Anonymous No.14817300]

>>14817295
OH NO NO NO NO NO NO NO ARTEMISTERS WTF IS THIS???/

[Anonymous No.14817302]

>the shitposters grain silo will launch before sls

[Anonymous No.14817306]

okay but why do they have to send women?

[Anonymous No.14817308]

>its already a scrub
oh no no no no no no no

[Anonymous No.14817309]

STS and its derivates have been a disaster for spaceflight

[Anonymous No.14817310]

Just roll the rocket back and cover it in tape. Problem solved.

[Anonymous No.14817311]

Hey guys, am I still in time for today's scrub?

[Anonymous No.14817312]

>>14817311
i think you're late

[Anonymous No.14817313]

Hahahahahaha this piece of shit will never launch. Shouldve hired those cherry picker mexicans to touch up your rocket.

[Anonymous No.14817314]

>>14817310

[Anonymous No.14817318]

>>14817310
This ain't spacex

[Anonymous No.14817323]

sisters... she's leaking

[Anonymous No.14817325]

>>14817295
let it out of its misery already

[Anonymous No.14817333]

>>14817306
>okay but why do they have to send women?
not sexist, just don't like 'em

[Anonymous No.14817334]

>govt sponsored "science" project run by small hat bankers turns out to be a malfunctioning money pit.
surprised pikachu face

[Anonymous No.14817345]

who is this alex guy and wtf is he so annoying

[Anonymous No.14817346]

>>14817306
gem

[Anonymous No.14817349]

is there a NASA PAO audiostream? I can't watch this NSF non sense

[Anonymous No.14817356]

>>14817349
NASA TV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21X5lGlDOfg

[Anonymous No.14817359]

>They will send manual commands to resume the flow of cryogenic fluid in hopes the seal reseats itself.

[Anonymous No.14817363]

if i ignore the flammable gas leak it will go away

[Anonymous No.14817364]

Leak fixed!
WE ARE GOING [to explode]!!!!
INSHALLAH BRING THIS ROCKET TO THE 72 VIRGINS!

[Anonymous No.14817367]

who gives a shit about a little leaking hydrogen, the air will just blow it away. SpaceX did a spin prime test with all engines on the booster a few weeks ago and spewed a shitton of methane and nothing happened

[Anonymous No.14817371]

>>14817367
>nothing happened
>nothing
>happened
I'm sure something happened anonita

[Anonymous No.14817372]

is the engine leaking or what?

[Anonymous No.14817373]

>Liquid oxygen is back up to full speed and at 40% filled.
WE. ARE. GOING.

[Anonymous No.14817378]

>>14817372
Yes but they said fuck it and are proceeding.

[Anonymous No.14817379]

TO DIE

[Anonymous No.14817380]

filler up

[Anonymous No.14817381]

kek they really want it to explode

[Anonymous No.14817383]

why are they venting?
what the fuck, jack asked a question and the andy guy completely ignored him

[Anonymous No.14817386]

Welcome to dark brandon's amerishart.
Come on man, let's put those lesbian niggers on the moon!

[Anonymous No.14817387]

>>14817345
the favela tranny?

[Anonymous No.14817392]

>>14817387
i think he goes by alex physics

[Anonymous No.14817396]

What does VSVN stand for? Its on the rocket

[Anonymous No.14817398]

>>14817396
Huh just realised its NΛSΛ

[Anonymous No.14817399]

>>14817396
Are you watching the feed upside down or something

[Anonymous No.14817402]

when is this thing launching?

[Anonymous No.14817403]

>>14817380
uʍop ɹǝlliɟ

[Anonymous No.14817405]

>>14817396
Its actually <n<n, moron. Can't you read?

[Anonymous No.14817406]

>>14817399
>upside down
Yes I am from Australia. Is it worth it waking up at 4AM or will this just scrub again?

[Anonymous No.14817409]

˙oppiʞ 'pɐǝp ƃuiʞɔnɟ ǝɹ,noY ˙ʇi ui uʍoɹp lliʍ noʎ puɐ noʎ ɹǝʌo llɐ ʎɹnɟ ʇiɥs lliʍ I ˙ʇoipi uɯɐppoƃ noʎ 'ǝɔiɹd ǝɥʇ ƃuiʎɐd ǝɹ,noʎ ʍou puɐ 'ʇ,upip noʎ 'ʇ,uplnoɔ noʎ ʇnq ˙sdɹoƆ ǝuiɹɐW sǝʇɐʇS pǝʇiu∩ ǝɥʇ ɟo lɐuǝsɹɐ ǝɹiʇuǝ ǝɥʇ oʇ ssǝɔɔɐ ǝʌɐɥ I ʇnq 'ʇɐqɯoɔ pǝɯɹɐun ui pǝuiɐɹʇ ʎlǝʌisuǝʇxǝ I ɯɐ ʎluo ʇoN ˙spuɐɥ ǝɹɐq ʎɯ ɥʇiʍ ʇsnɾ s,ʇɐɥʇ puɐ 'sʎɐʍ pǝɹpunɥ uǝʌǝs ɹǝʌo ui noʎ lliʞ uɐɔ I puɐ 'ǝɯiʇʎuɐ 'ǝɹǝɥʍʎuɐ ǝq uɐɔ I ˙piʞ 'pɐǝp ƃuiʞɔnɟ ǝɹ,noY ˙ǝɟil ɹnoʎ llɐɔ noʎ ƃuiɥʇ ǝlʇʇil ɔiʇǝɥʇɐd ǝɥʇ ʇno sǝdiʍ ʇɐɥʇ ɯɹoʇs ǝɥ ˙ʇoƃƃɐɯ 'ɯɹoʇs ǝɥʇ ɹoɟ ǝɹɐdǝɹd ɹǝʇʇǝq noʎ os ʍou ʇɥƃiɹ pǝɔɐɹʇ ƃuiǝq si ԀI ɹnoʎ puɐ ∀S∩ ǝɥʇ ssoɹɔɐ sǝids ɟo ʞɹoʍʇǝu ʇǝɹɔǝs ʎɯ ƃuiʇɔɐʇuoɔ ɯɐ I ʞɐǝds ǝʍ s∀ ˙ɹǝʞɔnɟ 'uiɐƃɐ ʞuiɥ ¿ʇǝuɹǝʇuI ǝɥʇ ɹǝʌo ǝɯ oʇ ʇiɥs ʇɐɥʇ ƃuiʎɐs ɥʇiʍ ʎɐʍɐ ʇǝƃ uɐɔ noʎ ʞuiɥʇ noY ˙spɹoʍ ƃuiʞɔnɟ ʎɯ ʞɹɐɯ 'ɥʇɹɐƎ siɥʇ uo ǝɹoɟǝq uǝǝs uǝǝq ɹǝʌǝu sɐɥ ɥɔiɥʍ ɟo sǝʞil ǝɥʇ uoisiɔǝɹd ɥʇiʍ ʇno ʞɔnɟ ǝɥʇ noʎ ǝdiʍ lliʍ I ˙ʇǝƃɹɐʇ ɹǝɥʇouɐ ʇsnɾ ʇnq ǝɯ oʇ ƃuiɥʇou ǝɹɐ noY ˙sǝɔɹoɟ pǝɯɹɐ S∩ ǝɹiʇuǝ ǝɥʇ ui ɹǝdius doʇ ǝɥʇ ɯ,I puɐ ǝɹɐɟɹɐʍ ɐlliɹoƃ ui pǝuiɐɹʇ ɯɐ I ˙slliʞ pǝɯɹiɟuoɔ 00Ɛ ɹǝʌo ǝʌɐɥ I puɐ 'ɐpǝɐnQ-l∀ uo spiɐɹ ʇǝɹɔǝs snoɹǝɯnu ui pǝʌloʌui uǝǝq ǝʌ,I puɐ 'slɐǝS ʎʌɐN ǝɥʇ ui ssɐlɔ ʎɯ ɟo doʇ pǝʇɐnpɐɹƃ I ʍouʞ noʎ ǝʌɐɥ ll,I ¿ɥɔʇiq ǝlʇʇil noʎ 'ǝɯ ʇnoqɐ ʎɐs ƃuiʞɔnɟ ʇsnɾ noʎ pip ʞɔnɟ ǝɥʇ ʇɐɥM

[Anonymous No.14817412]

>>14817406
The most powerful rocket witnessed by civilians ever (tm)
You don't want to miss this.

[Anonymous No.14817415]

>>14817406
its not worth it
100% chance it gets delayed a hour or two at the very least
high chance of scrub too

[Anonymous No.14817416]

why is this venting? is sls imposter?

[Anonymous No.14817419]

>>14817409
>Not "lɐǝɹ si S˥S"
Sir, this is /sfg/

[Anonymous No.14817421]

>>14817406
You can just slowly scroll /sfg/ to relive the moment

[Anonymous No.14817427]

Do the SRBs have an FTS of their own? If not, how is range safety guaranteed?

[Anonymous No.14817432]

>>14817396
kek

[Anonymous No.14817433]

>>14817427
Yeh you can see them blowing up the SRBs iin the Challenger footage.

[Anonymous No.14817445]

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1566045656938053634

[Anonymous No.14817449]

>still leaking

[Anonymous No.14817450]

>>14817445
Oh no no no SLSsisters

[Anonymous No.14817454]

spacex's history essay assignment just got 1000 words longer

[Anonymous No.14817459]

>>14817445
>But they don't want to get too far behind the timeline, because it would limit their ability to deal with other issues that arise.

[Anonymous No.14817464]

>>14817372
SLS is crying.

[Anonymous No.14817470]

so is the engine leaking or the pipe leading to the rocket

[Anonymous No.14817476]

When does the launch window close today?

[Anonymous No.14817479]

>>14817454
THE STARSHIP JUST GOT 10 FEET HIGHER!

[Anonymous No.14817481]

>>14817479
>not making it wider

[Anonymous No.14817482]

>>14817470
The LH2 lines at the cape seem to be exceptionally bad. My guess is the maintenance on them hasn't been stellar.

[Anonymous No.14817483]

>>14817454
it's over

[Anonymous No.14817486]

>>14817445
5h until explosion

[Anonymous No.14817487]

>>14817396

[Anonymous No.14817493]

>>14817476
4:17 ET

[Anonymous No.14817494]

>>14817487
>antipodeans are too dumb to just turn around 180 degrees and flip their heads back to see the moon in its proper orientation

[Anonymous No.14817496]

>>14817445
It begins

[Anonymous No.14817511]

>>14817464
"THEY BELONG IN MUSEUM!"

[Anonymous No.14817537]

Problems? It's working perfectly as intended

[Anonymous No.14817538]

hello /sfg/
came back from college. Anyone ready for the launch that may or may not kill spaceflight?

[Anonymous No.14817539]

>>14817311
kek

[Anonymous No.14817541]

>>14817511
>tfw you will never get to go look at these engines at an Air/Space museum
It isn't fair, they've already decided to make new RS-25e so why use the historic ones at all?

[Anonymous No.14817543]

>>14817538
nasa sure isn't

[Anonymous No.14817548]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPv0VZcvm4Q
>The explosion of the spaceX falcon 9 rocket on the pad in Aug. 2016 was a hell of a wakeup call. Nasa hasnt had an explosion while fuelling for ~40 years. This was all pretty well sorted out a LONG time ago.
>All that knowledge is basically locked up in NASA engineers minds. It seems remarkably optimistic to hope that Spacex will be able to do as good a job.

Ye of little faith. NASA sorted out fueling long ago.

[Anonymous No.14817552]

>TROUBLESHOOTING HAS NOT WORKED
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.14817555]

I CANT STOP LEEEEEEEEEEAKING

[Anonymous No.14817556]

JUST PUT SOME FLEX TAPE ON THE FUCKER
IT HAS BEEN YEARS JUST FLY THE BIG ORANGE BASTARD SON OF A BITCH

[Anonymous No.14817557]

OH NYO
SLS bros....

[Anonymous No.14817559]

bring out the o-rings

[Anonymous No.14817561]

> Not great: A second attempt to properly seal a hydrogen leak at an 8-inch line leading to the SLS rocket's core stage did not work. Launch team is now discussing a third troubleshooting plan.
WE. MAY. NOT. GO.

[Anonymous No.14817563]

>re-seating the leak has failed, plan C in the works
THEY KNEW ABOUT THIS SHIT SINCE THE DRESS REHEARSAL... ACTUAL SELF SABOTAGE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.14817564]

This is embarrassing, its actually over

[Anonymous No.14817566]

Hearing there’s a 41% chance of failure—it’s a space shuttle with tranny surgery after all

[Anonymous No.14817568]

>>14817566
Shuttle components crudely twisted into the shape of a heavy lift rocket, and it does not pass.

[Anonymous No.14817571]

Well the good news I guess is that it has two giant SRB’s, so at a certain point they have pretty much committed to launch with no going back

[Anonymous No.14817576]

hydromeme, not even once

[Anonymous No.14817583]

What is the quintessential Burger article that discusses all the problems and the price of the SLS? Trying to redpill my father who is already beginning to see the problem with price and shit capability. I can think of a few such as his article on the second tower or the delay from the green run but is there a “this is everything wrong with this rocket” article?

[Anonymous No.14817592]

>>14817583
theres nothing wrong with sls, its doing as intended, creating jobs

[Anonymous No.14817595]

>>14817583
I can’t seem to find it but he had one around a year or two ago about “slaughtering the pig,” and it was just one giant hit piece on SLS. It was kino I’ll try to look for it

[Anonymous No.14817603]

Just turn off that engine and drop the payload.

[Anonymous No.14817607]

Just tape some C4 at the side of the boosters and watch the fireworks

[Anonymous No.14817630]

>>14817568
lmao

[Anonymous No.14817632]

>>14815905
>>14815887
Close, but in fact he will just read what’s on the fucking card.

[Anonymous No.14817634]

Maybe the real Artemis program was the frens we made along the way

[Anonymous No.14817640]

>Scrubs, which you 4chan trolls so nobly hate, comes from destruction, disorder and chaos. Now take this hydrogen feed line. Here it is: peaceful, serene, boring. But if it is leaking..
>Look at all these little employees! So busy now! Notice how each one is useful. A lovely ballet ensues, so full of form and color. Now, think about all those people that are trying to fix the problem. Technicians, engineers, hundreds of people, who will be able to feed their children tonight, so those children can grow up big and strong and have little teeny children of their own, and so on and so forth. Thus, adding to the great chain of life. You see, /sfg/, by causing a little delay, I am in fact encouraging helping the space industry. In reality, Musk and I are in the same business.

[Anonymous No.14817651]

>>14817640
he's right you know

[Anonymous No.14817655]

>>14817487
what about equatoreans

[Anonymous No.14817668]

>>14817561
>Launch team is now discussing a third troubleshooting plan.
glue?

[Anonymous No.14817672]

>>14817668
they're gonna boil the rocket

[Anonymous No.14817674]

>>14817634
maybe the real Artemis program is the money we made along the way?

[Anonymous No.14817679]

>>14817655
no one is an equatorean, everyone is either in the northern or southern hemisphere

[Anonymous No.14817682]

All that delaying of Starship by FAA for this
Lmao

[Anonymous No.14817683]

>>14816453
I don’t believe that the Earth is flat and I don’t bait people with the claim either, but the flat Earther position is surprisingly more intellectually honest than the claims of most people who assert that the Earth is round, it’s irrefutable and they know it for sure.

The overwhelming majority of people couldn’t tell a good argument from a bad argument (although they have never tried to do so) and have not once thought about what makes an argument conclusive or irrefutable.

In other words, the flat Earth position is more reasonable than imagining that most of those who are actively “pro round Earth” even know what they’re saying.

[Anonymous No.14817687]

>>14817679
well what If I lay on the ground and one eyeball in in the southern and one on the northern hemisphere

[Anonymous No.14817688]

>>14817668
fill it with rp-1 and see what happens

[Anonymous No.14817694]

>>14817674
lol

[Anonymous No.14817699]

>>14817561
Oh no hydrolox bros, where did we go wrong?

[Anonymous No.14817702]

>>14817687
that's the geographic equivalent of dividing by zero, the Earth would reach infinite size

[Anonymous No.14817703]

>>14817688
dangerously based idea. I've heard the Rs-25 is a pretty though engine it could probably run on diesel if they tried

[Anonymous No.14817704]

>>14817566
>>14817568

[Anonymous No.14817708]

>>14817640
reads better in attenborough voice

[Anonymous No.14817710]

SLS is some WHACK ASS SHIT
this shit gonna BLOW UP

[Anonymous No.14817713]

>second attempt did not work
bros

[Anonymous No.14817715]

>>14817710
Didn’t work :( >>14817492

[Anonymous No.14817718]

SCRUB LMFAO HAHAHAHAHAHAHA GET FUCKED NASANIGGERS!
KEEP PIGGING UP THOSE SUPERCHATS TO NSF FAGGOTS!

[Anonymous No.14817719]

Third times the the charm!

[Anonymous No.14817720]

>>14817682
This cope always makes me laugh

[Anonymous No.14817722]

Hydrogenbros…

[Anonymous No.14817724]

>>14817703
SLS just needs moar electrolytes

[Anonymous No.14817728]

God damn it

[Anonymous No.14817729]

good morning anons
leeky launch thread t-100 bings from stream start

>>14817717

[Anonymous No.14817730]

SLS is some WHACK ASS SHIT [math]\unicode{x1F923}[/math][math]\unicode{x1F923}[/math] this shit gonna BLOW UP [math]\unicode{x1F4A5}[/math] [math]\unicode{x1F4AF}[/math]%% [math]\unicode{x1F923}[/math]

[Anonymous No.14817731]

Only option left is scrub. That'll be $23 billion plus tip.

[Anonymous No.14817736]

Hydrogen is the most abundant, and cunty, element in the universe

[Anonymous No.14817739]

>>14817683
its not about arguments retard, its about empirical measurements and simplicity
the ad hoc shit you need to explain all measurements in a flat earth model is ridiculous

[Anonymous No.14817751]

>>14817683

[Anonymous No.14817754]

>>14817736
Stars burn hydrogen for a reason. Nature hates it.

[Anonymous No.14817753]

> NASA has now essentially tried "turning it off an plugging it back in" twice now with the hydrogen line.
[math]\unicode{x1F480}[/math]

[Anonymous No.14817757]

>>14817753
they really dont know what to do huh

[Anonymous No.14817760]

>>14817739
reminder that all artillery units in every nation on Earth have to make coriolis effect corrections or they cannot target accurately

[Anonymous No.14817761]

why is this such a problem again?

[Anonymous No.14817774]

ok anons and anonettes
what do you think how high our chance is of an actual launch of sls happening today ?

[Anonymous No.14817779]

>wake up
>only thing happening today is getting scrubbed
*sigh*

[Anonymous No.14817786]

>>14817774
0% chance this YEAR, I’m not even memeing

[Anonymous No.14817790]

>>14817774
instead of trying something useful they actually just repeated the same procedure twice
i would say 1%
seems like even nasa doesnt want this to fly

[Anonymous No.14817803]

>>14817730


epic fail by nasa

[Anonymous No.14817804]

very delicious copium on nsf. heckin science npcs on suicide watch

[Anonymous No.14817805]

>>14817774
if you asked me 20 minutes ago i'd have still said 50% but with the latest failure to plug the leak it's 10% at best

[Anonymous No.14817810]

how the fuck are you getting emojis

[Anonymous No.14817811]

>aaaa-aaaa-aaaa- its orange!

[Anonymous No.14817812]

>>14817810
They're abusing math tags

[Anonymous No.14817813]

what is this?

[Anonymous No.14817815]

[math] [/math]

[Anonymous No.14817823]

>>14817813
they have several of those on the rocket and the pad. it's just for tracking the rocket's position relative to the pad during launch so they can determine its exact velocity when they review the film.

[Anonymous No.14817826]

>>14817815

[Anonymous No.14817829]

[Anonymous No.14817833]

nasa did this in 1960s why can’t they do this in 2022? It just shouldn’t be possible

[Anonymous No.14817834]

>>14817813
Bullet hole from the SpaceX sniper

[Anonymous No.14817835]

>>14817815
newfags can’t emoji [math]\unicode{x1F34A}[/math] [math]\unicode{x1F680}[/math]

[Anonymous No.14817839]

>>14817826
the cringe spoonfeeder

[Anonymous No.14817840]

[math]\unicode{x1F680}\unicode{x1F4A5}[/math]

[Anonymous No.14817843]

>>14817826
[math]\unicode{x1F493}[/math]

[Anonymous No.14817846]

>>14817833
>nasa did this in 1960s why can’t they do this in 2022? It just shouldn’t be possible
The two answers start with N and W

[Anonymous No.14817848]

no go

[Anonymous No.14817849]

>>14817833
>nasa never scrubbed in the '60s

[Anonymous No.14817852]

>>14817848
Only a suggestion, right?

[Anonymous No.14817853]

>NASA is expected to be "no-go" for launch of Artemis I today. Final decision is immnent.>NASA is expected to be "no-go" for launch of Artemis I today. Final decision is immnent.>NASA is expected to be "no-go" for launch of Artemis I today. Final decision is immnent.>NASA is expected to be "no-go" for launch of Artemis I today. Final decision is immnent.

[Anonymous No.14817856]

Well

[Anonymous No.14817857]

Berger’s about to become southwest airline’s favorite passenger as he flies out to florida once a week for the next year waiting for this fucker to go

[Anonymous No.14817859]

LMAOO

[Anonymous No.14817861]

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1566077665404125186
Scrub confirmed :/

[Anonymous No.14817862]

going back to the WDRs this is four straight failures caused by LH2 issues

[Anonymous No.14817863]

>>14817853
How soon can spacex launch realistically?

[Anonymous No.14817865]

see you next week bros

[Anonymous No.14817866]

WHAT HAVE THESE RETARDS BEEN DOING FOR ALL THESE YEARS????? FISTING THEMSELVES IN THE ASS IN A CIRCLE?

[Anonymous No.14817867]

SLS technically now has 6 WDR and it has yet to complete 1 lmao

[Anonymous No.14817868]

>>14817863
FAA's grading of their history report has been pushed back to december

[Anonymous No.14817869]

mayhap that starship will actually launch before sls

[Anonymous No.14817871]

>>14817863
sooner than nasa apparently

[Anonymous No.14817872]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-o3iYC_taQ

[Anonymous No.14817875]

>>14817561
but hydrologgs was supposed to be low risk

they SIMULATED it and had PROCEDURES in place
>>14817699
>30 years
>1000 people
>expendable launch vehicles
>$1T
that's pretty fucking pathetic innit

strange that a d-word made it into this picture however

[Anonymous No.14817876]

I fucking hate earth moralists. Human cloning could have been occurring for decades now. I hope all so-called “ethical” constraints shackling science are shattered in secret space pans

[Anonymous No.14817879]

>>14817729
what launch? they scrubbing bro, nsf already in damage control mode

[Anonymous No.14817881]

I fucking hate earth moralists. Human cloning could have been occurring for decades now. I hope all so-called “ethical” constraints shackling science are shattered in secret space labs

[Anonymous No.14817882]

>>14817876
Bruh raising a child isnt free.

[Anonymous No.14817883]

another launch attempt that successfully didn't blow up the rocket! this is a great day for team space!

[Anonymous No.14817884]

Blackwell-Thompson is NASA's first female launch director.

[Anonymous No.14817888]

>>14817875
>strange that a d-word made it into this picture however
The writing has been on the wall for at least 5 years (and especially the last 2 years) that they were gonna need something cheaper and more powerful. HLS Moonship was an obvious choice to compliment the piss poor performance of a rocket that was SUPPOSED to be ready circa 2017. The real shocker is how SeX was chosen even with the high R&D needed. In all honesty it’s almost astounding how NASA hasn’t suggested a fast tracking for the FAA licensing

[Anonymous No.14817890]

>>14817875
"Low risk" is no the same thing as "low difficulty." Hydrogen is always going to be an absolute bitch to work with. There's some great reasons why SpaceX discarded the idea of working with hydrogen years ago.

[Anonymous No.14817893]

>>14817890
Why not use helium as a rocket fuel?

[Anonymous No.14817896]

>>14817893
The rocket would float away before they could even launch it

[Anonymous No.14817897]

>>14817893
he-3, sure

[Anonymous No.14817899]

>>14817884
>>14817884
And?

[Anonymous No.14817902]

ORBITAL TEST FOR STARSHIP WHEN

FUCK HYDROGEN

FUCK CONGRESS

[Anonymous No.14817905]

>>14817888
NASA can suggest all they want but the bureaucrats are beholden to corporate symbiotes.

[Anonymous No.14817908]

>>14817896
>implying that's a bad thing

[Anonymous No.14817909]

[Anonymous No.14817912]

>>14817890
>"Low risk" is no the same thing as "low difficulty."
[math]\unicode{x1F923}\unicode{x1F923}\unicode{x1F923}[\math]

The whole point of using the hydrologgs stack, besides some marginal ISP gains, was that they'd be working with a mature tech stack and high readiness shit that doesn't pose high risks in integration. Aka they don't need to build a dozen rockets and blow them up before they have something that works, that was the whole arrogant sales pitch of this turd.

Now we're seeing that they can't get it to work without debugging the physical hardware either.

[Anonymous No.14817913]

so ... no launch today ?

[Anonymous No.14817916]

>>14817912
>[math]\unicode{x1F923}\unicode{x1F923}\unicode{x1F923}[/math]
fug

[Anonymous No.14817917]

Scrub is not official yet, launch director still looking at options

[Anonymous No.14817921]

>>14817917
someone's feeling the pressure

[Anonymous No.14817923]

>There's a big part of SLS that's reusable
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.14817924]

LMAO
The $40Bn experience machine, guys

[Anonymous No.14817927]

EXPERIENCE IS REUSABLE

[Anonymous No.14817928]

The big part of SLS that is reusable is the experience of the people working on this rocket

[Anonymous No.14817930]

>>14817055
Lookie Lookie

[Anonymous No.14817931]

bros! this actually a WET rehearsal with a CHANCE of launch!

[Anonymous No.14817932]

>>14817893
>Why not use helium as a rocket fuel?
its being worked on
>Metastable substances are materials that exist in a long-lived excited molecular state. Metastable Helium is one such substance, comprised of a Helium atom with two electrons, one in the first orbital level and one in the second orbital level. The electrons have parallel spin properties. The molecule is balanced on a knife's edge of quantum forces. The electrons want to enter into the ground state (where both electrons occupy the first orbital level) but are forbidden because of the forces acting upon them from their locked spin states. The atom can remain in this state for a mean time of 2.3 hours, but just a small input of energy (from jostling, molecule formation, electromagnetic forces, etc.) will send it over the edge into its ground state, resulting in a large release of energy, about 114 kilocalories per gram, or roughly twice the energy of the most powerful conventional chemical fuel, atomic hydrogen.
>Research is being conducted to see if metastable helium can be formed into a room-temperature solid if bonded with diatomic helium molecules, made from one ground state atom and one excited state atom. This solid, called Helium-IV-A, can in turn be used as a solid rocket propellant. Simply heating the fuel is enough to release the energy, so an oxidizer is not needed. These rockets would produce a specific impulse of about 2200 seconds—compared to the 450-second specific impulse for modern liquid hydrogen-oxygen rockets—and would have enormous thrust capabilities, on the order of 31,000 meters per second, matching types of proposed plasma and fusion rockets.
https://web.archive.org/web/20050520084733/http://www.strangehorizons.com/2004/20041115/orbitalodd-a.shtml

[Anonymous No.14817933]

>>14817923
why couldn't they reuse their shuttle experience to figure out how to fill the hydrogen tank

[Anonymous No.14817934]

REUSABLE
EXPERIENCE

[Anonymous No.14817939]

>>14817923
Well, they've reused it for scrubs two times already

[Anonymous No.14817940]

[math]\unicode{x2002}[/math]▲
▲ ▲

[Anonymous No.14817944]

>>14817940
kek

[Anonymous No.14817945]

>>14817917
hope he will do the right decision.

[Anonymous No.14817951]

It's not funny anymore

[Anonymous No.14817955]

scrub
(lmao)

[Anonymous No.14817956]

time to go back to anime

[Anonymous No.14817957]

No, I don't want to scrubs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrLequ6dUdM

[Anonymous No.14817959]

SHIT
LAUNCH
SYSTEM

[Anonymous No.14817962]

git gud

[Anonymous No.14817963]

>>14817912
Isn't liquid hydrogen used on many rocket launches?

What's the difference here, obviously something is messed up, but is it really to do with the hydrogen itself?

Could parts have become embrittled,?

Disconnected from being moved around so much?

[Anonymous No.14817965]

Let's be very honest again, we don't have a commercially available heavy lift vehicle. Falcon 9 Heavy may someday come about. It's on the drawing board right now. SLS is real. You've seen it down at Michoud. We're building the core stage. We have all the engines done, ready to be put on the test stand at Stennis... I don't see any hardware for a Falcon 9 Heavy, except that he's going to take three Falcon 9s and put them together and that becomes the Heavy. It's not that easy in rocketry.

[Anonymous No.14817966]

You can only put fuel in this fucking thing so many times and they keep resetting, holy shit this thing is really going to explode if they try to fly it.

[Anonymous No.14817970]

yikes

[Anonymous No.14817971]

>>14817912
It IS a mature tech. it's just a mature tech that uses a temperamental fuel that is prone to leaking. Shuttle had plenty of launch delays due to hydrogen GSE issues.

[Anonymous No.14817975]

>>14817965
>Falcon 9 Heavy may someday come about. It's on the drawing board right now.
Confused. FH has flown multiple times.

[Anonymous No.14817977]

>Another scrub
I was there monday to watch it
I'm so glad I didn't try staying for today

[Anonymous No.14817979]

[math][/math]

[Anonymous No.14817982]

>>14817951
Au contraire
I've seen the SLS SCRUB ABOUT A HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SEVEN TIMES, AND IT KEEPS GETTING FUNNIER EVERY SINGLE TIME I SEE IT

[Anonymous No.14817984]

>>14817963
SLS and all its components are abominations. SSMEs add such a vast amount of complexity, whose designers have long retired or died, for no purpose as reusability is not considered with SLS at all. Just look at the tower, they spent more reconverting old Shuttle infra that it'd have costed them to make a new one. There is no redeeming thing about SLS at all, it is the most pointless rocket to ever exist bar none.

[Anonymous No.14817985]

>>14817966
It's gonna require a refurbishment soon. What a clown show.

[Anonymous No.14817989]

>>14817963
Liquid hydrogen is an inferior launch vehicle stack. There are some marginal advantages in niche cases, but the reason it was picked for SLS was that it was supposedly a mature technology at a high technology readiness state - aka they could get it working without more extensive testing or R&D (so called "technological risk"). Well turns out they fucking can't, they're still getting hamstrung by the same shit everyone trying to develop a hydromeme launch vehicles trips over, despite this alleged low technological risk.

Might as well have gone for a new design from the ground up, actually optimized for the mission profile from the start rather than a hack job repurposing of shittle hardware.

[Anonymous No.14817991]

>>14817963
on this same subject, does anyone know if the GSE that's fucking up is old legacy shuttle stuff or new stuff that they built for SLS?

[Anonymous No.14817996]

it's been said they can only fuel the core stage up 9 times. does today make 6?

[Anonymous No.14817997]

>>14817975
It hadn't, back when that quote was uttered.
Meanwhile, Elon just put three Falcon 9s together and that became the Falcon Heavy, because it actually is that easy in rocketry.
see
>>14815789

>>14817985
It's going to be in a permanent state of "gonna fly soon" isn't it, every time they get close there's gonna be another reason to scrub and rollback.

[Anonymous No.14818003]

On the last B7 static fire one of the engines aborted so I guess they are even.
#TeamSpace

[Anonymous No.14818004]

>>14817975
hello newfriend
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ptPdlVAwFg

[Anonymous No.14818012]

God the NASA announcer sounds so defeated.

[Anonymous No.14818018]

[Anonymous No.14818024]

>>14818004
Oh. You know what's cool? These: ""

[Anonymous No.14818028]

>>14818024
you know what else is cool? lurking moar

[Anonymous No.14818029]

I am retarded how much money do they waste everytime they load up the fuel and other liquids just for it to be scrubbed

[Anonymous No.14818037]

>>14817989
>>14817984
But over the last few decades all or most of NASA launches of crew and cargo have been hydrogen fuel?

So the difference here is?
big.
bounced and moved around alot.
old parts.
fuel tanks refill a lot.
struck by lightening.

So is this leak occuring on something unrelated to last launch attempt problem?

[Anonymous No.14818039]

>>14818024
Anon, lurk moar. The "SLS is real" pasta has been posted here for years. You out yourself, anon.

[Anonymous No.14818043]

>>14818029
the biggest cost is probably all the personnel they have to have sitting around at the KSC and houston. actually running the pumps isn't that much money.

[Anonymous No.14818049]

Recommend a space game to play that will take away the pain /sfg/

[Anonymous No.14818053]

>>14818029
It is pretty expensive for bigger rockets just because the sheer amount you need, but you aren’t flying big rockets unless the fuel costs are trivial to you

[Anonymous No.14818054]

>>14818049
Not Orbiter 2016
worst UI ever, and nazi forum staff

[Anonymous No.14818059]

>>14818043
Propellant costs are always going to be marginal when compared to the hourly rate for a workforce of residual STS employees.

>>14818029
I just want to know what the gas bill for one round trip of the mobile launch platform is.

[Anonymous No.14818061]

[Anonymous No.14818064]

>>14818049
I’ve been trying to get into trains as a means of spreading my autism out due to the sheer let down that is the space industry. Although /n/ is way too slow or a board. I need a train game

[Anonymous No.14818065]

[Anonymous No.14818066]

How many more times can they fill core stage before they reach the limit?

[Anonymous No.14818071]

>>14818066
19 now

[Anonymous No.14818072]

>>14818064
I know that feel

for me its military shit, current and historical

BB Texas just had a successful sail under tow to drydock, first time a WW1 dreadnought has been in drydock in over 50 years, so that's cool

[Anonymous No.14818077]

>>14818066
One (1)

[Anonymous No.14818078]

>>14818004
It wasnt actually that easy in rocketry. Elon had to make a reinforced center stage for FH

[Anonymous No.14818081]

>>14818029
"For example, the rocket engines of each shuttle flight burn about 500,000 gallons of cold liquid hydrogen with another 239,000 gallons depleted by storage boil off and transfer operations."


I think it could be around $500,000 - $1,000,000 of fuel per launch.

When they fuel up the ship to scrub, they can't reuse that fuel I geuss

[Anonymous No.14818085]

>>14818066
In theory, they've got enough. In actual practice who even knows.

They've got another pair of launch windows on Monday and Tuesday, which they well almost certainly scrub as well, and then they've got to roll it all back to the VAB. If they found cracks in the LH2 tank during that my surprise would be so minimal you'd need to work as CERN to be able to measure it.

[Anonymous No.14818091]

>>14818072
Oh yeah Battlefield 1 got me autistically into WW1 tech. Also BB-35 has been docked right near my house, relatively speaking. It’s awesome

[Anonymous No.14818093]

>>14818037
>big.
>bounced and moved around alot.
>old parts.
>fuel tanks refill a lot.
>struck by lightening.
and all of this is fucking technological risk, don't you think? the "it just werks" promise doesn't hold, simple as
>over the last few decades all or most of NASA launches of crew and cargo have been hydrogen fuel?
Mainly because of the shittle, which was shit, and from which no expertise seems to have been transferred.

[Anonymous No.14818104]

[Anonymous No.14818105]

>>14818018
>400,000 people showed up for this

[Anonymous No.14818106]

>>14818081
It should be reusable right? Does the hydrogen become “dirty” somehow or would it all just evaporate trying to detank?

[Anonymous No.14818111]

>>14818091
Nice, it's such a cool sight

[Anonymous No.14818114]

>>14818111

[Anonymous No.14818117]

>>14818106
some of it's gonna evaporate but i would assume they can get most of it back. if/when the rollback happens i'm not sure what they do with it then.

[Anonymous No.14818122]

>>14818018
>after launch team gets scared

[Anonymous No.14818125]

Hydrogen is being ditched by ULA for their core stage, only left in their Centaur upper stage.
No new vehicle is planned with hydrogen iirc, it's all methane or RP-1.

Hydrogen as propellant is being phased out, additional ISP just isn't worth the squeeze for everything but deep space that maximizes C3.

[Anonymous No.14818129]

https://twitter.com/astro_aggie/status/1565145430505279488/photo/1

Astronaut approved

[Anonymous No.14818131]

>>14818105
>>400,000 people showed up for this
Keep these scrubs up maybe it will boost the local economy

[Anonymous No.14818132]

>>14818111
>>14818114
>>14818129
Space battleships fucking when bros

[Anonymous No.14818134]

>>14818077
This, unironically. ET wasn't built to be reusable.
Cryogenic temperatures create micro-fractures in aluminium as the metal is shrinking and expanding.
It will only get worse with each scrubbed attempt.

[Anonymous No.14818136]

>>14818125
>H-3 NIPPON
>SLS EUS (if not cancelled)

[Anonymous No.14818144]

unnnfff

[Anonymous No.14818149]

>>14818132
2 CENTURIES

[Anonymous No.14818153]

This could be Sea Dragon

[Anonymous No.14818160]

>>14818144
Still more functional than modern lockheed martin littoral ships

[Anonymous No.14818161]

nasasissies why do we keep losing.....

[Anonymous No.14818163]

>>14818160
yeah actually

[Anonymous No.14818167]

At this rate, a RUD would be better just to put the damn thing out of its misery.

[Anonymous No.14818168]

When do you think, they going to put SLS out of misery?

[Anonymous No.14818171]

>>14818161
from steely eyed missile men to mealy mouthed sissy men

[Anonymous No.14818174]

>>14818136
>H-3 NIPPON
First time I hear about it, what kind of C3 is it planned to have?

[Anonymous No.14818175]

>>14818153
Who will get out of drydock first? Texas or Kuznetsov?

[Anonymous No.14818177]

>>14818171
It's not funny Arnold. This rot will soon spread to private corporations.

[Anonymous No.14818178]

>>14818175
Texas lmao (1 year)

[Anonymous No.14818181]

>>14818167
I think a RUD of SLS would destroy NASA's reputation to the point that any and all space projects in the long term would be damaged severely regardless of whatever private industry is doing.

[Anonymous No.14818184]

Here's a radical idea

>SLS core stage test tank
>hook up to GSE at pad to test for leaks in the GSE lines and fix them before an actual rocket is on the pad

Why didn't they do anything like this, clearly these hydrogen leaks are gonna keep happening

[Anonymous No.14818189]

>>14818184
The fact that they didn’t do this at any time in the past, or apparently check the GSE lines at all, makes me think NASA is just totally dysfunctional.

[Anonymous No.14818192]

>>14818177
like a tumah?

[Anonymous No.14818193]

>>14818184
Space is hard, ok?

[Anonymous No.14818195]

>>14818189
its full of boomers that dont care and incompetent zoomers and diversity hires, all the competent ones go to places like spacex or tech companies

[Anonymous No.14818201]

>>14818189
Agreed
>wait for the first time ever to test your GSE infrastructure handling LH2 when the fucking fully assembled rocket is on the pad

Fucking incompetence

[Anonymous No.14818208]

>>14818184
boeing would probably charge $2 billion for a dummy tank

[Anonymous No.14818213]

>>14818208
Didn't they already? They made the one they overpressurized to destruction, it popped along the seam.
https://youtu.be/-W5EXElmqC4?t=23

[Anonymous No.14818225]

I wonder what's next in this SLS shitshow.
Another helium system malfunction?
Another hydrogen leak?
An engine won't light?
Fueling problems?
So many possibilities.

[Anonymous No.14818229]

When's the next launch window?

[Anonymous No.14818231]

>>14818225
SRB leak

[Anonymous No.14818232]

This is so fucking embarrassing. Chinks will get a moon base first.

[Anonymous No.14818233]

>>14818229
Monday, but NASA administrator whasisname said he thinks a mid-October launch is more likely at this point.

[Anonymous No.14818235]

>>14818229
potentially ones on monday and tuesday but berger thinks they're going to skip those and roll it back until late october

[Anonymous No.14818237]

This garbage will never fly. Just scrap it already.

[Anonymous No.14818239]

freshly baked oc

[Anonymous No.14818241]

>>14818174
The H3 is probably best imagined as the second coming of the Delta IV medium, which is kinda to be expected given the close ties Japanese aerospace has had with McDonnell/Boeing over the years. It's got about the same proportions and performance to GTO as the DIV med, but it doesn't outsource literally all the sub-assemblies like Boeing did so it's hoping to fly for about $45M. It might be able to win itself a respectable share of the launch market if Russian booster remain excommunicated.

[Anonymous No.14818242]

>>14818235
>>14818233
>roll it back until late october
OH NO NO NO

[Anonymous No.14818249]

So Starship gets delayed 2 more years now right? Can't have it launch before Scrubbed Launch Shitfest.

[Anonymous No.14818251]

>>14818233
Why even keep delaying it? It's never going to work. It's a fucking frankenstein of 40y old tech.

[Anonymous No.14818259]

I wonder what people who worked on Saturn V are thinking about it.
It's gotta be severe disappointment.

>>14818249
FAA already finished environmental assessment and cleared them, there is nothing that could stop them at this point.

[Anonymous No.14818261]

>>14818249
Not like it's launching this year

[Anonymous No.14818264]

>>14818177
the ussa does not have private corporations

[Anonymous No.14818266]

>>14818259
ARE there any people left who worked on Saturn V?

[Anonymous No.14818271]

>>14818259
You still don't understand what you're dealing with, do you? A perfect bureaucracy. Its structural perfection is matched only by its hostility.

[Anonymous No.14818272]

>>14818266
if you were a college grad who just did grunt work in the drafting room you'd be in your 70s now

[Anonymous No.14818274]

>>14818184
>>14818189
How did this work fine a few days ago; last scrub was something unrelated,

How come a few days later the thing that worked fine is not working now?

So they changed and tinkered with the engine that wasn't working, and in that process something else got messed up?.

[Anonymous No.14818275]

>>14818266
Probably a few. I know one of the Apollo CM/LEM test engineers is a neighbor of mine.

[Anonymous No.14818277]

>>14817867
THIS IS WHY WE TEST!!!

[Anonymous No.14818278]

what if we use a fuel that doesn't leak out of every sub-micron gap?

[Anonymous No.14818280]

>>14818024
>Oh. You know what's cool? These: ""

[Anonymous No.14818281]

>>14818274
The shuttle ET was never meant to be load bearing or reusable. Next time they have to let it launch or scrap the core stage entirely.

[Anonymous No.14818282]

>>14818241
>$45M
Surprising and impressive for an expendable Falcon 9 competitor

[Anonymous No.14818288]

>>14817867
The Astra of testing

[Anonymous No.14818289]

>about to open stream 2h before launch
>already scrubbed
NASA bros?
Is this rocket real?
It can fly, right?

[Anonymous No.14818290]

>>14818064
I diversified into excavators
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT34bygObUM

[Anonymous No.14818292]

>>14818241
Nice, if they deliver, it'll definitely be able to compete in GEO and past GEO market with this high ISP with upcoming rockets.

[Anonymous No.14818294]

>>14818239
Imagine being crew sitting in the rocket on the pad waiting to launch

>we're having trouble with an engine but we think it might work, just gotta give it a few kicks, ok it seems like it should work now
>we are good to go, continue countdown
>T- 1 hour
>wait wait, we are having trouble fueling the ship, sit tight crew just hold your horses

[Anonymous No.14818296]

if engineers are recommending a rollback when they still have 2 launch windows left does that mean it's a serious problem?

[Anonymous No.14818297]

Save us from the hydromeme boomer tyranny, Mr. Musk

[Anonymous No.14818302]

>>14818018
IT SAW ITS SHADOW

[Anonymous No.14818304]

>>14818296
It's never going to fly.

[Anonymous No.14818306]

>>14818294
>Alright we can fix this, but the team's really sleepy so we're going to wait until Monday.
>You'll be fine in there right?

[Anonymous No.14818307]

>>14818297
Musk is wisely keeping quiet. They will come to him in due time.

[Anonymous No.14818308]

>>14818304
Don't be like this, it might be able to actually launch and explode.

[Anonymous No.14818310]

time to ring up that space shuttle heritage contractor to manufacture that one-off piece of piping over the weekend

[Anonymous No.14818313]

Why dont nasa niggers build gravitational lensing telescope of jupiter
>bu.. bu.. but it needs to go 6000AU
So just use one of the moons as a second lens.
How hard can this be..

[Anonymous No.14818315]

why is this leak such a big issue. Can't they just let some hydrogen leak

[Anonymous No.14818316]

>>14818289
>It can fly, right?
There is at present no evidence to this claim.

[Anonymous No.14818325]

>>14818281
Was a few days ago the first time they filled the tank (for SLS)?
And that aspect worked pretty well

But this time it didn't?
So what could have changed?

Either the fueling or transfering process something changed?

[Anonymous No.14818324]

>>14818315
This kills the rocket.

[Anonymous No.14818328]

>>14818325
something cracked, more like

[Anonymous No.14818329]

apparently someone drilled a small hole in the piping

[Anonymous No.14818330]

>>14818315
Didn't you see SpaceX bellowing the test range with their excess methane? This is not the NASA way.

[Anonymous No.14818335]

t-2 hours, strap on your seatbelts bros

[Anonymous No.14818338]

>NASA detects tiny leak which is a natural consequence of hydrogen
>Scrubs

>SpaceX pumps thousands of litres perfectly mixed propellant into the air during spin prime
>it obviously blows up and damages a couple of engines
>SpaceX replaces engines
Two different mentalities

[Anonymous No.14818340]

VAB bros we won

[Anonymous No.14818342]

SS bros we won

[Anonymous No.14818345]

[Anonymous No.14818349]

hydrogen bros...we escaped...

[Anonymous No.14818351]

gost blus bros we won

[Anonymous No.14818360]

>>14818349
https://youtu.be/kz5kv0RfeUc?t=130

[Anonymous No.14818361]

>>14818338
>Two different mentalities
Yeah, moon launch and static test

[Anonymous No.14818362]

>>14818338
Yet neither are leaving the pad, curious

[Anonymous No.14818363]

>>14818349
Hydrogen is the only thing going to space in the SLS program.

[Anonymous No.14818364]

>>14818313
>gravitational lensing telescope
> can only look at one object
> have to build another one if you want to look at something else
they're meme bullshit and won't be built

[Anonymous No.14818371]

>without SpaceX space travel will have no future for decades to come
Jesus, such a nightmare reality, i guess this happen when you run out of autistic nazis

[Anonymous No.14818374]

>>14818349
this is why you dont use hydrogen

[Anonymous No.14818376]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[Anonymous No.14818382]

>>14818349
oh i just got the joke lel

[Anonymous No.14818383]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.14818384]

>>14818364
>can only look at one object
Only a problem for solar lensed telsecope because they have to reposition light hours away if they want to observe something else.
Jupiter and its moon can combine into observe anything you like and you only have to move somewhere within jupiter system. It's literally that easy.

[Anonymous No.14818389]

>>14818313
Gravitational lensing sucks.
Terrascope is the new cool kid that is better in every regard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgOTZe07eHA

[Anonymous No.14818392]

>>14818371
We're not out just yet.
>Who do you think OWNS the press?
>t. Elon

[Anonymous No.14818407]

[Anonymous No.14818411]

so what are the chances SLS won't fly this year

[Anonymous No.14818412]

>>14818411
99,98%

[Anonymous No.14818413]

>>14818371
>>14818392

[Anonymous No.14818415]

>>14818411
100%

[Anonymous No.14818414]

>>14816472
no, Venus casino

[Anonymous No.14818422]

>>14816555
an older meme but it checks out, sir

[Anonymous No.14818423]

>>14818282
Like I said, they didn't outsource anything they didn't have to. Boeing purchased the fairings, the first and second stage engines, the avionics, and the communications system for the Delta IV from someone else. They even bragged about "how many nationwide partners" the Delta IV had. The H3 gets it's fairings from Kawasaki and it's boosters from IHI who also use them as the first stage of JAXA's Epsilon rocket. Everything else is made in-house by Mitsubishi.

They also seem to have fixed the issue they were having with the LE-9 turbopumps so we might actually see a launch in the next seven months or so.

>>14818292
I wouldn't be too surprised if it ends up costing more than $50 million, but with most new rockets focusing on LEO constellations there's a nice opening for a rocket that's efficient with higher altitude work. With the Vulcan and Ariane 6 out of stock thanks to Amazon there's also a pretty big demand for ANY med-heavy lift capacity that's not the Falcon 9. If even if it doesn't find a big market it'll will be more than capable of meeting Japan's national security needs and it'll give JAXA a launcher that'll let them continue to expand their deep space work.

[Anonymous No.14818424]

So if hydrogen is so hard, how the fuck is airbus planning to move all aircraft design to hydrogen?

[Anonymous No.14818427]

Starship will go orbital before they figure out SLS.

[Anonymous No.14818431]

>just drop $100k for a cubesat bro
space is still too expensive to get into

[Anonymous No.14818433]

>>14818431
you should get a validated cubesat kit for $20k or so

[Anonymous No.14818440]

>>14818177
The US unironically needs another great depression to clean the rot out of the system

[Anonymous No.14818444]

>>14818424
It probably won’t happen for the same reason it isn’t going to happen in cars. It takes an IMMENSE amount of energy to make hydrogen, and while your end product might be “zero emissions,” you sure as hell are going to burn a lot of coal trying to make that hydrogen in the first place. Plus it sucks donkey dick to store whether it’s in a rocket fuel tank or a gas station/air port. We need better battery tech. Speaking of which, is it just a meme that lithium might run out soon?

[Anonymous No.14818448]

>SLS stuck on pad
>Starship stuck on pad
following spaceflight is the worst

[Anonymous No.14818449]

>>14818444
you can make hydrogen from solar though.
Check out casey' handmer's terraform industries.
Storage is still challenging. But batteries simply don't have the required density for long range aircraft.
Oh wait, just use the hydrocarbons generated by terra form indies .
Casey is 2 steps ahead.

[Anonymous No.14818450]

>>14818449
I’m not a newfag I know full well about terraform industries, and while it might be useful for something like a mars colony it isn’t going to be replacing gasoline infrastructure on earth

[Anonymous No.14818456]

>>14818384
Nope. Even 10 AU from Jupiter the lensing angular ring is only about 1.2 arcseconds across, 10 times smaller than the visible disk of the planet at that distance. So it's unobservable.

[Anonymous No.14818459]

>bad sensor no leaks
>no leaks sensor good
>bad leaks sensor bad
>good leak sensor good

iiititwhuiot34gy85pgvuihfds

[Anonymous No.14818464]

>>14818459
Is this all from today or from multiple WDRs?

[Anonymous No.14818470]

>>14818424
Are they going to, or are they just talking about going to? Europe isn't as bad as Russia when it comes to talking about fancy shit they're never going to do, but that doesn't mean they never do it.

>>14818444
Maybe they'll build a hydrogen economy using their super efficient space based solar power assets?

Hydrogen isn't bad a energy storage medium for something like solar or wind but trying to bottle and transport it like its better gasoline is where most of its plans fall apart.

[Anonymous No.14818475]

>>14818470
Have you seen how they are planning to store that hydrogen?
In fucking caverns filled with so much hydrogen it's yield would be in Mt if it mixed with oxygen, what could possibly go wrong?

[Anonymous No.14818476]

I just got reminded that hydrogen could be used to store energy for the grid. not the most unfeasible of all the ideas out there.

[Anonymous No.14818478]

>>14818464
its all that happnes and can ahappen

so tiresome

[Anonymous No.14818481]

scrubex

[Anonymous No.14818483]

Scrubbed Launch System
Artemissedthelaunchwindow

[Anonymous No.14818485]

It seems Nasuh did not get all the datur

[Anonymous No.14818487]

>>14818384
>>14818313
The minimum focal distance for the Sun is 550 AU, for Jupiter it is 6060 AU. The moons are totally negligible. You better start walking now.

[Anonymous No.14818494]

I'm told that Space Launch System program officials will recommend a rollback to the VAB to investigate the hydrogen leak. The Artemis I mission management team will consider this recommendation at their afternoon meeting, and publicly announce a decision at 4pm ET.

[Anonymous No.14818496]

>>14818448
Starship is not on the pad and no flight hardware exists yet

[Anonymous No.14818498]

>>14818483
>Artemissedthelaunchwindow

[Anonymous No.14818507]

>NET October

[Anonymous No.14818514]

>>14818487
That's why you use the moon as a second lens

[Anonymous No.14818523]

How do space ships / space stations ground their electricity

[Anonymous No.14818526]

>>14817719
>build several huge fucking lightning rods on top of towers to protect rocket
>lightning decides to strike rocket anyway

what did nature mean by that?

[Anonymous No.14818528]

>>14818392
People always take that so out of context. The convo was something like "the media protects rich powerful people" and then he replied with that, referring to the rich powerful people

[Anonymous No.14818529]

>>14818526
you mean what did the deity in your pic mean by that? Only the digits know

[Anonymous No.14818531]

one of the new smallsat launchers will probably reach orbit before SLS

[Anonymous No.14818536]

>>14818528
And then a bunch of actual Jews screamed at him for no apparent reason. If he didn't know before he does now.

[Anonymous No.14818539]

>if they scrub on monday/tuesday then the rocket will break and they'll have to roll it back
HAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.14818541]

>>14818539
Looking like they won't even try Monday/Tuesday

[Anonymous No.14818550]

How much delta v in the super dracos?

[Anonymous No.14818553]

What booster does starship need to get to orbit with an SLS sized payload?

And what booster HLS to the moon?

[Anonymous No.14818554]

>>14818536
Yeah that's funny how Jews always get nervous even when nobody mentions them. They're so hypersensitive with a victim mentality, similar to how BLM blacks see racism everywhere

[Anonymous No.14818558]

>>14818536
Isnt that where "cool it with the antisemitism" come from?

[Anonymous No.14818566]

>>14818558
That just makes me think of the American Psycho scene https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHDNtDWqAmc

[Anonymous No.14818568]

Damage control 'update' in 1hr 30 mins

[Anonymous No.14818569]

reminder that sls will never fly
captcha: JKKKJJ

[Anonymous No.14818571]

>>14818553
Super Heavy could lift an entire SLS block 2 outside of the atmosphere, including the SRBs. If RS-25s could air light it'd be a possibility.

[Anonymous No.14818573]

Despite all those delays, SLS is still launching before Starship

[Anonymous No.14818576]

>>14818573
and that is supposed to be an accomplishment

[Anonymous No.14818578]

>Despite all those delays, SLS is still launching before Falcon Heavy

[Anonymous No.14818580]

>>14818475
>>14818470
Youre saying hydrogen easily fuses? Or just chemical reaction, they share electron bonds and electrons are released? How it explode so easy

[Anonymous No.14818584]

>>14818576
Elon will have to wait for permission from the big boys like the autistic cuck he is, cope muskrat

[Anonymous No.14818583]

>>14818571
Put some sparklers on the superheavy.

[Anonymous No.14818585]

>>14818523
>How do space ships / space stations ground their electricity
What does electrical grounding absolutely mean?

[Anonymous No.14818586]

what is the most engines that S24 and B7 have each static fired?

[Anonymous No.14818587]

>>14818568
YO BOUNCE, IT'S ME BIG OUNCE
WHAT'S GOOD MUTT, YOU NEVER PAID ME

[Anonymous No.14818588]

>>14818064
Do you like factories? Factorio is cool

[Anonymous No.14818589]

>>14818576
Yes, because there is a race between SLS and Starship.

[Anonymous No.14818593]

>>14818054
>nazi forum staff
Is this supposed to be an upside or a downside?

[Anonymous No.14818595]

>>14818593
Think powertripping jannies, not Paperclip.

[Anonymous No.14818596]

>>14817297
you need to commission that sort of image, people won't make it for free

[Anonymous No.14818600]

>>14818596
When I start making money, I'll definitely order some drawins for /sfg/

[Anonymous No.14818605]

>>14818589
>Yes, because there is a race between SLS and Starship.

how. SLS will be used 4 times, politicians will get their credit and then ditch it forever. Starship doesn't even need to compete.

[Anonymous No.14818606]

>>14818571
Has super heavy been launched yet, and with starship on it?
What and when will the next starship launch be? What does starship need to do before it has a super heavy test?
And is there such thing as a full test of super heavy starship to orbit, or is it prepare to succeed mission?

[Anonymous No.14818608]

>>14818605
/sfg/ kept telling me that Starship will beat SLS to orbit

[Anonymous No.14818611]

>>14818566
I see, this is where its from

[Anonymous No.14818615]

>>14818580
Oh, it can't come in contact with oxygen at all or a little. So how do they and would they expect to make hydrogen fuel a common thing.

[Anonymous No.14818616]

>>14818573
SLS was supposed to launch before Falcon Heavy, not Starship.

[Anonymous No.14818619]

What's the worst that could happen if they ignored that hydrogen leak?

[Anonymous No.14818621]

So Starship will do another hop before the orbital launch?

[Anonymous No.14818624]

>>14818619
Rocket go boom

[Anonymous No.14818625]

>>14818608
I don't think even the most optimistic spacex autists thought that, but in any case Starship is a leap forward in terms of spaceflight and SLS a step backwards, so it's expected SLS flies first.

[Anonymous No.14818633]

>>14818621
Sid is a twitter larp not a SpaceX employee

[Anonymous No.14818639]

>>14818621
>So Starship will do another hop before the orbital launch?
If the first orbital starship doesnt need to land and there is immediate need and desire to get a starship in orbit, then an attempt to get starship in orbit is the most important pressing act, and precedes the need for a hop.

Then it is, is the first attempt of starship with the booster it needs to get to orbit, be an attempt to orbit obviously right?

[Anonymous No.14818641]

https://youtu.be/GNpR8yPumJ4

[Anonymous No.14818642]

>>14818633
Substantiate your claims.

[Anonymous No.14818643]

>>14817583
doesn't Casey have one of those

[Anonymous No.14818648]

>>14817583
Go to wikipedia and check the "criticism" section.

[Anonymous No.14818654]

>>14818307
>You couldn't live with your own failure. Where did that bring you? Back to me.

[Anonymous No.14818655]

>>14818625
>I don't think even the most optimistic spacex autists thought that
yes they did, and I'm starting to believe it too

[Anonymous No.14818657]

will dreamchaser ever launch

[Anonymous No.14818665]

what if we cut up the SLS, use it as Skylab II and launch it into orbit inside Starship?

[Anonymous No.14818668]

>>14818657
Eventually. 2023 seems likely.

[Anonymous No.14818672]

>>14818657
Probably before crewed shitliner at this rate

[Anonymous No.14818679]

>>14817583
>>14818648
>Senate Launch system
http://www.competitivespace.org/issues/the-senate-launch-system/
>Monster Rocket Will Eat America’s Space Program
https://web.archive.org/web/20111006080619/http://spacefrontier.org/2011/09/15/monster-rocket/
>Propellant depots: the fiscally responsible and feasible alternative to SLS

https://www.thespacereview.com/article/1955/1

[Anonymous No.14818684]

Starship flies first
And you vill be happy

[Anonymous No.14818691]

>>14818679
Imagine how much better things could be.
It all started going downhill with space shittle and been only getting worse since.

[Anonymous No.14818697]

>>14818514
Makes no significant difference, the focal distance is so much longer than the orbits of the moons that it's approximately a single thin lens. And the masses of the moons are totally irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.14818698]

>>14818691

[Anonymous No.14818711]

>>14818266
Yes, there are still a decent amount of WW2 veterans they are certainly much older then the younger Apollo engineers

[Anonymous No.14818721]

>>14818642
if they were spacex, they would have been fired

[Anonymous No.14818732]

maybe SLS can launch only once like Ares

[Anonymous No.14818735]

>>14818444
pretty sure that it's a meme akin to "peak oil"

[Anonymous No.14818736]

>>14818697
I figured. Plus this is better in every way
>>14818389

[Anonymous No.14818738]

>>14818721
Jesse, another SpaceX employee, also posts on twitter.

[Anonymous No.14818746]

>>14818698
Make that Apollo and you're getting closer. All of the awful horizontal spread we're seeing with SLS started with the steps that were taken to get congress to fund the Saturn V.

[Anonymous No.14818749]

>>14818600
you can hold the piss please

[Anonymous No.14818753]

Do they take the spacemen out now?

[Anonymous No.14818761]

Are we still going, hydrogen bros?

[Anonymous No.14818762]

>>14818494
>at their afternoon meeting
AfterMOON meeting, more like it!

[Anonymous No.14818765]

>2022
>time to add another 2 screenshots at the end

https://youtube.com/watch?v=4ptPdlVAwFg

[Anonymous No.14818769]

>>14818315
>hydrogen
It's basically just a water leak and since NASA only employs women now there's no one there who knows how to fix a leaking pipe.

[Anonymous No.14818772]

Imagine an alternative reality where commercial space never got funded and SpaceX went bankrupt and all we have to look forward to is SLS.
Now that's truly miserable reality.

[Anonymous No.14818773]

>>14818772
Only one of many, many doomed potential timelines

[Anonymous No.14818778]

>>14818772
Someone else would take up the mantle. It would be inevitable.

[Anonymous No.14818798]

The scrub cope briefing has been pushed back by a half-hour to 4:30 EST. It's just not that easy in teleconferencing. Please adjust your expectations accordingly.

[Anonymous No.14818800]

nasa livestream starting now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNpR8yPumJ4

[Anonymous No.14818802]

>>14818798
Motherfucker I have work, hurry up with the excuses NASA

[Anonymous No.14818805]

>>14818798
>scrubbing the scrub
Fucking kek, at least they're consistent

[Anonymous No.14818807]

It's over.

[Anonymous No.14818810]

>>14818807
I feel bad for the actual talented people working on this trainwreck

[Anonymous No.14818811]

I admit it, it was me, I sabotaged this launch. TRUMP 2024

[Anonymous No.14818813]

>>14818807

[Anonymous No.14818815]

expendable space program

[Anonymous No.14818817]

>>14818811
This is what NASA gets for not keeping Big jim

[Anonymous No.14818828]

>>14818483
>artimissed
Fucking kek

[Anonymous No.14818832]

>>14818810
I don't
anyone with dignity or competence left
all that are left are the irredeemable spergs who are smug about being their boomer manager's personal property rather than human beings

[Anonymous No.14818841]

Evolution of the Prometheus family of rockets for my KSP career.

>Prometheus A
An IRBM test vehicle designed to reach 4000 kilometers. In this timeline/my KSP career, the Korean War ended with the deployment of several nuclear missiles. This accelerated America’s drive to build bigger missiles. Thor and Titan were replaced by a single missile family, called “Prometheus.”

>Prometheus B
Another IRBM test vehicle.

>Prometheus B SLV
Orbited the first American satellite. A solid motor on top of a Prometheus B

>Prometheus C/Artemis
Carried the first American lunar probes. First use of a liquid second stage (Able)

>Prometheus D/Mercury
Carried the first Americans into orbit. Used a second stage powered by an Atlas sustainer engine (LR-105). Used for several decades after for small payloads to LEO.

>Prometheus E
Risk reduction effort for its later sisters. Launched several Agenas and spy sats

>Prometheus F/Gemini
Triple core Prometheus vehicle. Carried the Gemini capsules into orbit. Later used as a medium lifter for various missions. Final Prometheus with the original tank lengths.

>Prometheus G
Stretched tank version of the F. Final use of the LR79 engines.

>Prometheus H
Risk reduction effort for future developments. First use of the H-1 engines on Prometheus. Final use of a kerosene upper stage in the family.

>Prometheus I
The “I” is now a Roman numeral 1. Debuted a large hydrogen upper stage powered by a J-2. This vehicle was designed to carry Apollo capsules into LEO for servicing missions to Skylab and US space stations.

>Prometheus II
“II” is pronounced TWO. Debuted an extra pair of Castor solid motors for the vehicle. It was used to carry the first non-Skylab stations to LEO, as well as unmanned resupply vehicles.

>Prometheus III
“III” pronounced THREE. Ultimate Prometheus evolution. Used four Castor 4 motors as extra boosters. Second stage stretched to the max and powered by a J-2 with an extending nozzle.

[Anonymous No.14818845]

All these delays are giving me time to put together a passable SLS effigy to burn on the eventual launch day

[Anonymous No.14818847]

>>14818841
Cool stuff, are you doing using RO and RSS?

[Anonymous No.14818848]

>>14818807
>>14818800
2 mins now

[Anonymous No.14818850]

As I woman I agree that it is better to delay this mission and put the money to causes back here on Earth. We are suffering from Climate Change and Racism everywhere. Not to even mention that female homelessness is a serious problem.

[Anonymous No.14818856]

>>14818841

[Anonymous No.14818858]

>>14818841
alt-history and videogames and especially alt-history video games are not on topic
cool images of your cool rogget going to spess are on topic
please fix this deficiency

[Anonymous No.14818859]

>>14818841
Thats pretty cool. I just started with KSP and i feel like a retard following the tutorials. I guess i'll git gud eventually

[Anonymous No.14818861]

Bill looks like hes about to have an aneurysm...

[Anonymous No.14818862]

>>14818859
just watch old Scott Manley videos and then blow up a bunch of rockets and then look at the numbers and realize you're an idiot and then do it again a couple of times

[Anonymous No.14818863]

>recounting all the times the space shuttle was scrubbed and crawled back to VAB
they're softening us up for some bad news lol

[Anonymous No.14818865]

>>14818863
This is the fourth time I've heard him tell that story in the last three days. Realistically it's going back to the VAB, I doubt they announce that today though.

[Anonymous No.14818866]

>>14818800
>>14818807
LIVE

[Anonymous No.14818868]

>>14818863
As if space shittle was a good comparison, they aren't putting the bar very high.

[Anonymous No.14818869]

>It's ok cos the shittle broke down all the time also :)
DIE

[Anonymous No.14818871]

>>14818811
Trump was cheering for the launch to succeed.

[Anonymous No.14818874]

Starship will fly first now. The next SLS launch period is next month

[Anonymous No.14818875]

Does this mean even more money for contractors?

[Anonymous No.14818876]

>>14818874
Do you actually expect Starship to be ready by then?

[Anonymous No.14818879]

>>14818876
Yes

[Anonymous No.14818880]

>>14818874
FAA wont give them loisense until SLS goes first

[Anonymous No.14818885]

>>14818880
I suspect the FAA wants certain information SpaceX can only get by doing static fires and that's probably the major reason they don't have a license yet (and possibly not even applied yet).

[Anonymous No.14818886]

>>14818880
They already have the loisense with environmental assessment finished, everything else is just a formality.

[Anonymous No.14818891]

oil is leaking out my car and I don't give a shite. Why all the fuss

[Anonymous No.14818892]

>SLS represents greater safety, less risk, and increased probability of mission success in the dynamic, unforgiving environments of spaceflight.
Lol, lmao, even.

[Anonymous No.14818893]

We are learning, ok? Give us a break

[Anonymous No.14818894]

Holy fuck, are you serious?
Billions of dollars for this.

[Anonymous No.14818896]

>>14818874
>next month
If they require roll back, it would be 2+ months

[Anonymous No.14818899]

>>14818841
>mfw I couldn't beat KSP's tutorials

[Anonymous No.14818900]

>>14818772
>>14818778
Japan never gets any mainstream attention but JAXA has consistently produced results. They just don't feel like getting into an e-peen battle with America over manned launches to the Moon or Mars

[Anonymous No.14818901]

>bureaucratic fault tree

[Anonymous No.14818902]

>>14818894
tens of billions

[Anonymous No.14818903]

>we have to go back [to the VAB]
WE. ARE. GOING. (BACK)

[Anonymous No.14818904]

>>14818896
Roll back confimed. Batterty change/refurb requirement confirmed. Maybe other problems as well later on.

So thats 2+ months

[Anonymous No.14818908]

If not for Elon Americans would be a laughing stock of Space programs.

[Anonymous No.14818909]

>>14818876

[Anonymous No.14818911]

>>14818896
>>14818904
LP 27 is late October. Late this month is possible in theory, but unlikely. Still, that's next month and (a little) less than two.

[Anonymous No.14818913]

So much for the billion dollar launch tower

[Anonymous No.14818915]

>>14818876
I expect the White House to be screaming at NASA and the FAA to get at least one of the two flying before midterms because letting Trump be the "back to the stars" candidate terrifies Democrats going in to 2024.

Yes this is political bullshit but I honestly don't know what the technical hold up is for B7/S24.

[Anonymous No.14818918]

>>14818554
>They're so hypersensitive with a victim mentality,
it's actually a guilty conscience, a VERY guilty conscience, that makes them act that way

[Anonymous No.14818919]

>>14818900
Considering they are an small space agency and have less budget, JAXA is surprisingly effective for it's scale. They even got samples from asteroids.

[Anonymous No.14818924]

>>14818904
>Another two month minimum delay for starship

Fuckkkkk

[Anonymous No.14818923]

Good morning /sfg/! Sorry I missed the launch thread, how did it go??

[Anonymous No.14818925]

>>14818900
Historically, JAXA has higher quality space footage than NASA because Japanese TV broadcasters actually help jointly fund and develop space cameras with JAXA. You won't ever see this type of media relationship in America.

>The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) and Japan Broadcasting Corporation (NHK) have decided to jointly develop a “Super Hi-Vision Camera” that is capable of filming 4K and 8K images in space for JAXA’s Martian Moons eXploration (MMX) mission. This would be the first time in history that 8K ultra high definition images of Mars and its moons are taken in proximity. By combining the actual flight data of the MMX spacecraft and the images taken by the Super Hi-Vision Camera, the exploration of the MMX spacecraft around Mars and its moons (the Martian system), 300 million kilometers from the Earth, will be recreated.

>JAXA is currently developing the MMX spacecraft to be launched in JFY 2024, with the aim of clarifying the origin of the Martian moons and the evolutionary process of the Martian system. MMX is an internationally high-profile sample-return mission that aims to conduct scientific observations of the Martian moons, Phobos and Deimos, and of Mars, as well as land on Phobos to collect "sand" from its surface to return to Earth.

>NHK is developing the Super Hi-Vision Camera in order to visualize MMX's challenges in ultra high definition images and broadcast them widely, with cooperation from JAXA. Images taken at regular intervals are partially transmitted to Earth to create a smooth image. The original image data is planned to be stored in a recording device in MMX's return capsule and brought back to Earth.

https://global.jaxa.jp/press/2020/09/20200910-2_e.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1KWtG66lEQ

[Anonymous No.14818926]

Did he just say they closed the wrong valve?

[Anonymous No.14818930]

>>14818925
yea but NHK is a public broadcaster, so makes sense they'd work with other government organizations

[Anonymous No.14818932]

>>14818900
JAXA's budget is tiny and their rockets are based on the Delta II.

[Anonymous No.14818933]

>>14818528
>>14818536

[Anonymous No.14818936]

>>14818913
This thing is the problem?

[Anonymous No.14818938]

>>14818909
I want to believe, but

>>14818915
I'm sure the White House would like that but I'm pretty sure they're going to defer to Nelson, I don't see much pressure coming from there except "It'd really be nice if we could get this thing finally flying".
>I honestly don't know what the technical hold up is for B7/S24
Maybe not having been static fired with more than three engines (for B7, and by the looks of it, not even properly when they tried with three; S24 is probably close to ready though), plus whatever structural concerns there may still be with B7 especially after the explosion and possible flame diversion/sound suppression issues (will the current system be sufficient to make the rocket not blow itself up with (the pressure of) its own exhaust)?
There's not necessarily a hold up currently rather the vehicles have not been fully tested yet (where hold ups may be discovered). Remember that the Starships for the hops all did extensive testing beforehand, especially SN8 for the first attempt had a month+ test campaign, Super Heavy is far more complex and this is its first proper test campaign and they're just starting the static fires. It's going to be a while yet.

[Anonymous No.14818948]

>>14818908
>India would have the second most capable space program, right behind China
Boy am I glad I don't live in that world.

[Anonymous No.14818947]

>>14818932
>their rockets are based
Yes.

But seriously I like how they tend to focus on the gaps in NASA's major objectives to maximize the new science per yen spent. Venus missions, solar sails, now Martian moons. JAXA feels more like a true partner agency to NASA than anyone else but ESA.

[Anonymous No.14818950]

>>14818908
>>14818948
Reconsider the decision to retire the shuttle before a replacement was found in this light. This country was, and to a degree still is, being deliberately dismantled. Yes, the shuttle was deeply flawed, but it beats the hell out of NO manned space program.

[Anonymous No.14818954]

>>14818948
India wouldn't be ahead of USA by any measure.

[Anonymous No.14818957]

>>14818389
Is there any reason not to fund this? What does a 1m telescope cost, like thirty dollars?

[Anonymous No.14818959]

UGGGGGGGGH IHATE THIS CONFERENCE

[Anonymous No.14818960]

>>14818926
That's how I read it. Then he said they quickly rectified the issue. It also seems he said this caused the pressure to rise to 60 psi. Smart journos figured out that a leak and a pressure rise aren't related

[Anonymous No.14818965]

>>14818891
Because NASA is fags, women & cucks.

[Anonymous No.14818967]

>It's whole new vehicle
>It's whole new technology
>Uhh Space is hard
Lmao, just lmao

[Anonymous No.14818968]

>space is hard
it's clearly not, a bored autist is putting you to sleep with his hobby start-up company

[Anonymous No.14818969]

>>14818967
We need an SLS """launch""" stream bingo

[Anonymous No.14818971]

>we're not feeling any pressure

[Anonymous No.14818972]

>we're not feeling any preasure
that's the problem right there

[Anonymous No.14818974]

Of course they don't feel pressure. They're guaranteed free pork barrel money.

[Anonymous No.14818977]

Okay.

Now I want Starship to launch first.

Fuck SLS

[Anonymous No.14818979]

>>14818977
No SLS launch, no FAA licence mate. How many time have we told you.

[Anonymous No.14818980]

>>14818977
>now

[Anonymous No.14818981]

>>14818979
FAA is going to get top-to-bottom firings when Biden's out of office. Since President De Santis is going to have the military asking for it first thing.

[Anonymous No.14818983]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9kwzg1X0xU

SpaceX is building a 520K sqft building in Batrop, Texas. Roughly the size of SpaceX's planned new buildings for Roberts road Starship factory or the size of their California's SpaceX headquarters.

[Anonymous No.14818989]

>>14818981
The president can't actually fire most bureaucrats like that.
Many of these people are literally untouchable, they're like professors with tenure.

[Anonymous No.14818990]

replacement rvac for s24

[Anonymous No.14818992]

>>14818983
wtf why in the middle of nowhere Texas, it's not even close to Boca Chica or the coast?

[Anonymous No.14818993]

[Anonymous No.14818995]

>Huge crowds monday
>Small crowds today
No one will show up to Artemis-1 launch and I'm glad :)

[Anonymous No.14818996]

>>14818990
Industrial kino aesthetics hnnnnnnnnnng

[Anonymous No.14818999]

>>14818981
Yeah bro he's gonna drain the swamp, based deep state remover

[Anonymous No.14819000]

>>14818992
Bastrop is just outside of Austin. It's not 'the middle of nowhere' by Texas standards.

[Anonymous No.14819008]

>>14818999
Lol, I think I heard this somewhere before, I think it didn't go so well.

[Anonymous No.14819010]

>>14818989
What can be done by one Congress can be undone by a later Congress. If there's enough support for fixing that we may see a change soon.

[Anonymous No.14819012]

>>14818989
He appoints the administrator, who will do the necessary firing of anyone who can get in the way.
>>14818999
No one mentioned the orange man, do you need your dose upped?

[Anonymous No.14819015]

>>14819000
In terms of rocketry, yes it is in the middle of nowhere. It's not even close to any launch facilities so why build a huge ass factory there?

[Anonymous No.14819018]

>>14819012
>No one mentioned the orange man, do you need your dose upped?

Settle down, I'm agreeing with you, he's going to save the country single handedly because he is so based, might need to up the Israel donation quota but that's a small price to pay for a based republican who will restore the republic and btfo the demoncrats

[Anonymous No.14819019]

>>14818992
>>14819000
Bastrop is ~20 mins drive from GigaTexas facility. Its also got their new Boring Company headquarters there. Near GigaTexas, is another Starlink factory. So SpaceX/Tesla is setting up a lot of shop in Texas. Up north to Giga Texas is McGregor SpaceX engine factory/testing facility about ~1 hour 40 min drive. Down south 5 and 1/2 hour is Starbase

[Anonymous No.14819020]

>>14818990
It's just ridiculous that SpaceX is mass-producing their own full-flow staged combustion engines while NASA had to steal them from musems for their Megumin rocket.

[Anonymous No.14819021]

Who is going to be the true American patriot who dumps deadly chemicals around the Boca Chica facility to kill all the local wildlife, guaranteeing a beetle no one cares about can no longer be used to delay SpaceX?

[Anonymous No.14819025]

>>14819020
Different mindset. SpaceX engineers crave glory victory. NASA engineers want a pension.

[Anonymous No.14819028]

>>14818899
which one is giving you trouble

[Anonymous No.14819032]

>>14819028
I don't remember now, but it's one of the early ones. Landing the capsule with parachutes, I think.

[Anonymous No.14819033]

>>14819020
Don't forget, they paid 146 million dollars to have each of those stolen engines refurbished.
I bet SpaceX can build all the engines for their booster for as much as refurbishment of a single stolen SLS engine.

[Anonymous No.14819035]

SpaceX will test Raptors at former gun range near Boca Chica

[Anonymous No.14819037]

>>14818989
can't?
lmao

[Anonymous No.14819038]

>>14818992
Cheap land, between Austin, Houston, and still relatively close to Starbase. Maybe wants to help more small towns and boost their economy, too.

[Anonymous No.14819045]

>>14819015
close to Gigafactory Austin, easy for elon to go between them

[Anonymous No.14819046]

I do not think whatsoever that it is related to SLS, but seriously why is the FAA taking soooooooo long for this launch license????????
And in terms of SpaceX, if they got the license tomorrow and were allowed [hypothetically] to do unlimited orbital tests do you think Elon would return to the iterative ‘launch fail fix’ method? Or has Starship just hit a big rut and they are doing fundamental work right now and it’s not ready to go

[Anonymous No.14819049]

>>14819046
>I do not think whatsoever that it is related to SLS

It is

[Anonymous No.14819050]

>>14819049
Can you prove it?

[Anonymous No.14819051]

What could possibly be being built in Bastrop? They aren't moving the HQ there; too many employees have families in LA. But the building is absolutely massive and is too far from Boca to be meaningful starship support. Starlink factory?

[Anonymous No.14819056]

>>14818992
Texas might be huge, but as someone who lives in Houston I consider Houston-San Antonio-Austin-DFW and every small city in between to pretty much be it’s own state. I travel between all of them for work—anything outside of that such as El Paso, Midland, Brownsville, or the panhandle requires a rental car or a flight and is on a whole nother level of “far”. Dallas can suck when traffic is bad but that bullet train would be kino and would help. A bullet train to Brownsville or Boca Chica would also be awesome but now I’m really on a tangent.
As for Bastrop it’s pretty close to the rest of the big cities

[Anonymous No.14819061]

>>14819051
too many employees right now, but they might start moving stuff gradually to texas, eventually shutting down the LA factory the last workers either moving or getting laid off

[Anonymous No.14819062]

>>14819049
It makes no sense to be, even hypothetically. It’s the second or third most vital component of Artemis behind SLS and maybe Gateway; sabotaging it with such a tight schedule already in place makes no sense. Plus Falcon Heavy would have been put on some sort of federal muddling scheme long ago if they really wanted to slow spacex down, FH was a clear threat to the SLS program way before SS even existed and they had that beast cleared for flight pretty fast

[Anonymous No.14819072]

gifs don’t work on iPhone
>itoddlers btfo

[Anonymous No.14819074]

>>14819046
Launch license requires some data from the vehicles after doing tests. Launch license isn’t given until XYZ static fires and stacking are done

[Anonymous No.14819075]

>>14819033
Raptor 2 is $1 million. SpaceX could build 4 complete starship Superheavy engine sets for the cost of a single RS 25

[Anonymous No.14819077]

>>14818947
JAXA wants to tread new ground instead of being CSS and repeating American and Soviet accomplishments.

[Anonymous No.14819080]

>>14819046
>>14818885
Also the vehicles aren't ready yet, either. A launch license tomorrow would not mean a launch tomorrow.

[Anonymous No.14819081]

>>14819072
.gif have worked on iphones for years now

[Anonymous No.14819083]

>>14819081
Imagine having to tout that as a feature.

[Anonymous No.14819084]

>>14819075
>for the cost of a single RS 25
For the cost of a single refurbished RS 25 stolen for a museum to be exact, those engines aren't new.

[Anonymous No.14819086]

>>14819049
Yes I believe this, call me whatever name you want

[Anonymous No.14819087]

>>14819075
>Raptor 2 is $1 million
nah that's just muskrat fart sniffing
at the lowest it would be 5 million

[Anonymous No.14819088]

>>14819083
Imaging being wrong and still trying to claim you were right.

[Anonymous No.14819092]

https://www.space.com/6969-history-shuttle-launch-delays.html

We're back to this now

[Anonymous No.14819097]

>>14817094
Saved the fiscal budget for next quarter.

[Anonymous No.14819102]

>>14819088
How you liking your .webm support, by the way? Heard you guys got that just a few months back.

[Anonymous No.14819109]

>>14819087
That's still seventy (70) (LXX) (seven-zero) (sedemdeset) times cheaper than refurbishment of a single musem exhibit put on SLS.

[Anonymous No.14819113]

[Anonymous No.14819120]

>>14819075
>Raptor 2 is $1 million
Did you sniff that number from your ass just now?

[Anonymous No.14819122]

>>14819062
>Plus Falcon Heavy would have been put on some sort of federal muddling scheme long ago if they really wanted to slow spacex down
How many times has FH launched and how many of its gov payloads keep getting pushed back?

[Anonymous No.14819125]

>>14819120
Elon has said it multiple times

[Anonymous No.14819128]

New Berger.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/09/years-after-shuttle-nasa-rediscovers-the-perils-of-liquid-hydrogen/
>the FTS batteries might require a roll back to the VAB
the ABSOLUTE STATE of NASA

[Anonymous No.14819130]

I went out to a party. What did I miss bros?

[Anonymous No.14819131]

>>14819120
That info is straight from Musk. Target price is $250K a pop. Now fuck off, newfag.

[Anonymous No.14819137]

>>14819131
>That info is straight from Musk
;'DDD

[Anonymous No.14819138]

>>14819122
This is actual schizoposting and you are so far down the conspiracy train that you can’t discern made up scenarios from common sense at this point.

[Anonymous No.14819141]

>>14819138
Because all those delays are a series of completely unrelated accidents, right?

[Anonymous No.14819142]

[Anonymous No.14819143]

>>14819142
o shid :DDD

[Anonymous No.14819145]

>>14819141
If by accidents you mean payload slips then yes.

[Anonymous No.14819147]

>>14819142
glad we have such intelligent people with science and engineering backgrounds working in government
that's the kind of thing we need more of

[Anonymous No.14819149]

WE

[Anonymous No.14819150]

WUZ

[Anonymous No.14819151]

>>14819130
NASA embarrassing itself as usual

[Anonymous No.14819152]

>>14819141
Falcon Heavy's commercial payloads are also slipping, as are payloads commercial and governmental on F9 and other rockets. Payloads and launches always slip.

[Anonymous No.14819153]

>>14819147
we're lucky to have astronaut running nasa

[Anonymous No.14819155]

>>14819128
>Saturday Leak System —

[Anonymous No.14819156]

>>14819131
>>14819125
Source for $1M per Raptor or GTFO

[Anonymous No.14819157]

>>14819128
>Over its lifetime, due to this complexity, the shuttle on average scrubbed nearly once every launch attempt. Some shuttle flights scrubbed as many as five times before finally lifting off. For launch controllers, it never really got a whole lot easier to manage the space shuttle's complex fueling process, and hydrogen was frequently a culprit.
Yikes

[Anonymous No.14819162]

>>14819156
NTA, Wikipedia says 1 million and as low as 250k with mass production but cites no source.

[Anonymous No.14819165]

>>14819157
The crazy thing is that Centaur and DCSS have used hydrogen for decades without nearly as many issues.

[Anonymous No.14819168]

>>14819162
1M in 2019. 3 years ago. A lot has changed. Raptor 2 is cheaper than Raptor 1.

[Anonymous No.14819169]

>>14819165
It's all the orange tank's fault.

[Anonymous No.14819171]

>>14819156
From 2019: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1179107539352313856

Pic related from last year.

[Anonymous No.14819176]

>>14819142
link to Berger's question?

[Anonymous No.14819177]

>>14819152
It seems that FH payloads slip more than others

[Anonymous No.14819179]

>>14819168
Which part of 'cites no source' do you not understand?
It's just hearsay anyone could write here without source.

[Anonymous No.14819182]

>>14819177
They’re more critical payloads prone to slipping such as giant deep space NASA missions and DoD spooksats. Most common satellites, even heavy ones, go on F9 now that they updated merlin so much and F9 started eating into Falcon Heavy’s capabilities.

[Anonymous No.14819184]

>>14819171
>aspirational shit
when's full self driving ai gonna drop elon?!

[Anonymous No.14819188]

>>14819184
Its already out

[Anonymous No.14819189]

>>14819176
https://youtu.be/GNpR8yPumJ4?t=1460

[Anonymous No.14819191]

>>14819109
>slovenian
but why

[Anonymous No.14819192]

>>14818880
>>14818885
Do they need a license to try another launch and land?
What is the mission of starship next launch?

[Anonymous No.14819197]

>We are going to stay!
>Stay on Earth for another 50 years of course.

[Anonymous No.14819199]

>>14819191
Because it's the only language other than English I know.

[Anonymous No.14819202]

>>14819142
>>14819176
>>14819189
https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/09/years-after-shuttle-nasa-rediscovers-the-perils-of-liquid-hydrogen/?comments=1

[Anonymous No.14819203]

>>14818990
>That tasteful patina
Very nice.

[Anonymous No.14819216]

>>14819179
Irrelevant source is worse than no source

[Anonymous No.14819217]

>>14819032
you should try again and blog about it so we can tell you why you're retarded

[Anonymous No.14819221]

>>14819177
They're big payloads

[Anonymous No.14819222]

>>14819221
>>14819221
>>14819221
>>14819221

[Anonymous No.14819223]

>>14819221
For you.

[Anonymous No.14819228]

>>14819222

[Anonymous No.14819229]

>>14819171
https://nitter.kavin.rocks/elonmusk/status/1179107539352313856?lang=en

From 2019, Raptor is tracking WELL UNDER $1M. Whats well under $750K? He didn't say $500K. Maybe $800K or $900K for conservative estimate?

Then Raptor 2 should be well under Raptor 1, with many design simplifications and improvements. So should be under ~$500K. if long term "$1000 per ton of force" from 2019 is 2022, then does that mean $300K barrier has already been crossed? Is it close to $230K, I doubt it, but $300-$500K is more likely

[Anonymous No.14819230]

>>14819192
I think they still need individual licenses for each hop, but as they're a known operation, they should be able to get one easily (minus some Raptor 2 test data maybe). From latest pronouncements, the next test launch should be a full stack to space.

[Anonymous No.14819243]

What happens when a solid rocket booster reaches its shelf life date? If the o-rings fail again I swear…

[Anonymous No.14819246]

we are all clowns

[Anonymous No.14819248]

>>14819229
>Believing Musk when he talks about financials
He tends to omit a lot of costs like labour and other stuff to get to the raw "materials only" cost (and then probably lops off several hundred thousand of "possible savings" when he says "tracking"). That said, Raptor does seem to be a pretty cheap engine. Personally I'd still assume $1-2 million as a reasonably optimistic guess. The reality of it is that anything under 5 million is already ridiculously cheap.

[Anonymous No.14819249]

>>14819230
It's still taking much longer than what people were predicting. Is the time frame due to red tape? Or actual engineering issues?

[Anonymous No.14819251]

>>14819165
the GSE hasn't been used properly in a very long time please understand

[Anonymous No.14819254]

>>14819246
the year isn't over yer

[Anonymous No.14819257]

>>14819248
When you mass produce stuff, the fixed cost of labor is spread out across hundreds of engines and soon thousand of engines. When that happens, the only cost that matters is raw materials cost and few percentage of labor cost.

[Anonymous No.14819258]

>>14819199
tell Polenar Tactical I said hi
alternatively have you been to the Arex factory yet

[Anonymous No.14819259]

>>14819243
Roll back. Inspection. Then it's a 1 time extension if everything else checks out fir launch. Or they replace them.

4/6 expendable falcon 9 first stages could replace the SRBs.

[Anonymous No.14819264]

to interrupt the boredom I will play some KSP before bed (I am on vacation now)
>>14819246
yeah I'm okay with that

[Anonymous No.14819265]

>>14819254
they won't launch

[Anonymous No.14819269]

>>14819264
>he plays games and browses 4chan on his vacation
unironically go touch grass

[Anonymous No.14819274]

>>14819269
that's scheduled for tomorrow (it's fucking dark outside)

[Anonymous No.14819275]

>>14819264
> will play some KSP before bed
kissing & sucking penis

[Anonymous No.14819282]

>>14819275
hot gay spaceplane sex

[Anonymous No.14819285]

>>14819249
Engineering issues. No booster or fully engined ship have gone through a full testing campaign to become flight ready so far and the GSE hasn't been ready until very recently (some parts arguably still aren't and we don't know if it's ready for a full launch yet). See also >>14818938.

>>14819257
Yes, mass production helps a lot with that, but those costs still exist and if you keep lopping off random costs that "don't matter" it does add up. Also an engine per day (another goal they're probably not quite at yet) is very quick for a big rocket engine, but not mass production in the sense that only minimal fractions of fixed costs apply to it. A full day for all the people necessary to build a highly complex engine will still cost you quite a bit.

[Anonymous No.14819289]

>>14819246
sls was supposed to launch in 2016

[Anonymous No.14819294]

finally

[Anonymous No.14819298]

>>14819142
SLS is just an Ares V with RS-25 instead of RS-68 but it doesn't surprise me that Eric Berger retweeted a cool story bro.

[Anonymous No.14819300]

>>14819285
Engine a day @ 250K = ~$180million dollars per year
Engine a day @ 2 million = $730 million per year

in 2017, the annual spending budget for SpaceX was $800 million. Including all the merlin engines, falcon 9s, falcon heavy, r/d, operations, raw materials acquisitions, every employees, etc.

There's no way their Raptor engine cost $2m per piece, its impossible.

[Anonymous No.14819303]

What portion of the cost of Falcon 9 were the Merlins?

[Anonymous No.14819304]

>>14819300
it's important to note that Raptor costs are most likely almost entirely fixed, and the only thing that's causing the cost to decrease is them making more of them

[Anonymous No.14819309]

I fucking hate Boeing
That is all

[Anonymous No.14819311]

>>14819298
The Ares family on a fixed price contract would have been kino

[Anonymous No.14819315]

>>14819304
So it costs $2M theoretically for a Raptor that only exists as a single unitary existence?

But real life mass production process has reduced that cost down to $~300-500K a pop due to mass production. Your idealized cost of Raptor is meaningless when reality hits the fan.

[Anonymous No.14819316]

>>14819315
no you nigger I'm a third person (I'm playing KSP right now) (I'm trying to decide if I want to level up more kerbals by doing a minmus landing or just get this Duna mission done)

[Anonymous No.14819317]

Delta III

[Anonymous No.14819320]

>>14819317
Doomed from the start, taken from us before her time.

[Anonymous No.14819322]

>>14819316
>(I'm trying to decide if I want to level up more kerbals by doing a minmus landing or just get this Duna mission done)
Send a temporary one-way trip to Jool.

[Anonymous No.14819323]

>>14819317
what if we used zero percent of the brain

[Anonymous No.14819324]

>>14819246
it's called COVID-19, retard

[Anonymous No.14819326]

>>14819322
I don't have anything with the delta v designed for that mission and I don't have comms powerful enough for it yet I don't think

[Anonymous No.14819327]

>>14819323
>>14819320
>>14819317

[Anonymous No.14819335]

Ironically, the Able second stage would eventually be used on the Thor, where it would be renamed Delta. All Thors with a Delta (Able) second stage would make up the Delta family. Delta III and IV are therefore not a true Delta

[Anonymous No.14819336]

>>14817739
That's great, but what percentage of the people who waste their time smugly saying that the Earth is absolutely round know that? That's my point. They're both groups of smug idiots and the ones who are wrong are actually doing a little more reasoning, even if it's faulty. Being right by accident is no more meritorious than being wrong.
Exhibit A here didn't even read the post he's replying to:
>>14817751

[Anonymous No.14819338]

It is time

[Anonymous No.14819341]

>>14819338
…to replace engine #3829492949838283 and pray the tile doesn’t crack this time!

[Anonymous No.14819344]

>>14819341
It takes SpaceX 1 hour to replace an engine. Meanwhile it takes Boeing/NASA years to make 1 engine that may or may not be possible to replace the engine.

[Anonymous No.14819355]

>>14819344
Yet neither are flying lmao

[Anonymous No.14819356]

>>14819338
I'm gonna fucking cum

[Anonymous No.14819357]

>>14819355
One hasn't been flying since late 60s.

Other has flown half a dozen times in suborbital tests

[Anonymous No.14819360]

>>14819344
>It takes SpaceX 1 hour to replace an engine
no they don't

[Anonymous No.14819365]

>>14819338
>star of david shadow

[Anonymous No.14819372]

>>14819360
They do now.

[Anonymous No.14819373]

>>14819360
lol we have literally watched them do it

[Anonymous No.14819375]

Never enter space threads on /pol/ , you'll want to blow your brains out. The mental retardation is off the charts.

[Anonymous No.14819380]

>>14819373
>never [...] /pol/
fixed that for you

[Anonymous No.14819381]

>>14819375
/pol/ is 75% bots and 20% leftist raiders from bunkerchan and /news/
it stopped being salvageable years ago

[Anonymous No.14819389]

>>14818950
we went 8 years without doing anything serious in LEO after apollo too (ASTP doesn't count)

[Anonymous No.14819397]

>>14819294
>I'm not the only one who puts the tiniest decoupler on top of a larger fairing base

>>14818899
One of the later part updates actually breaks the tutorials anyway, so it's not just you

[Anonymous No.14819418]

>>14819397
you can cheese that so bad in rp1, making a .1m decoupler for a 10m stage just to save mass

[Anonymous No.14819419]

[Anonymous No.14819423]

>>14819419
Embarrassing.

[Anonymous No.14819425]

>>14819419
the foam is chipping away :(

[Anonymous No.14819427]

How many trips back to the VAB until the whole rocket is broken permanently?

[Anonymous No.14819428]

>>14819419
They could fuel the fucking thing just fine when it was in alabama
Maybe it can only really function in Shelby's dark domain

[Anonymous No.14819429]

>>14818950
>his country was, and to a degree still is, being deliberately dismantled
It's shocking how obvious it is relative to the average person's perception of it.

[Anonymous No.14819430]

>>14819427
it already is seems like

[Anonymous No.14819431]

>>14819427
-1
It already is

[Anonymous No.14819435]

>>14819428
The true reason for the bama river rock crawlerway...

[Anonymous No.14819436]

>>14819427
it’s fucked

[Anonymous No.14819447]

>>14819435
I forgot about that, jesus.
"No, you have to use rocks from MY state, or I won't vote to approve!"
We need to expend the entire senate and congress asap, they are all far past their shelf life.

[Anonymous No.14819450]

>Accurate assessment. Raptor design started out using H2, but switched to CH4. Latter is best combo of high efficiency & ease of operation imo.

Delta-v difference between H2 & CH4 is small for most missions, because CH4 tank is much smaller & no insulation is needed.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1566233000458592256

[Anonymous No.14819463]

>>14819450
why was this worth posting, we all know this

[Anonymous No.14819464]

>>14818990
Look at how streamlined the design is. The RS-25 is still a rat's nest after almost FIFTY YEARS of production.

[Anonymous No.14819468]

>>14819463
>We all know
You'd be surprised how many rocket autists angrily dispute the validity of this point

[Anonymous No.14819470]

>>14819150
GAAN

[Anonymous No.14819472]

>>14819464
no incentive to streamline

[Anonymous No.14819478]

>>14819081
Well I tried to upload the gif and it became a jpeg.

[Anonymous No.14819482]

>>14819472
But, the RS-25e? and RS-25f, is that still a thing? They were supposed to get simpler after they burned through the museum pieces.

[Anonymous No.14819484]

>>14819482
>RS-25e
supposedly

[Anonymous No.14819486]

>>14819447
Why they went with a giant tank instead of a rail system I'll never understand.

[Anonymous No.14819490]

>>14819051
>>14819061
SpaceX has a massive turnover rate from burnout. They can just start hiring in Bastrop and stop hiring in LA and wait.

[Anonymous No.14819493]

>>14819486
Very sad; trains are awesome. Rocket rails are even more kino. Is the baikonur train steam or diesel?

[Anonymous No.14819494]

>NASA officials are still assessing the cause of the leak, but they believe it may have been due to an errant valve being opened. This occurred during the process of chilling down the rocket prior to loading liquid hydrogen. Amid a sequence of about a dozen commands being sent to the rocket, a command was sent to a wrong valve to open. This was rectified within 3 or 4 seconds, Sarafin said. However, during this time, the hydrogen line that would develop a problematic quick-disconnect was briefly over-pressurized.

THAT'S IT?!??

[Anonymous No.14819501]

>>14819494
it's that easy? in rocketry

[Anonymous No.14819504]

>>14819494
This is something they missed in the green run and WDR due to not doing a full prop load.

[Anonymous No.14819505]

>>14819486
huh. I never thought about that. Maybe it weighs too much? the N1 is sideways. Or the climb onto the pad is too steep? Baikonur doesn't have a raised launchpad, just a giant pit.

[Anonymous No.14819507]

>>14819504
And it worked on Monday?

I dont get it

[Anonymous No.14819508]

>>14819507
human error is inconsistent

[Anonymous No.14819512]

>>14819397
I use the decoupler sized appropriately for the smallest of the two pieces I am attaching
in this image the decoupler is attached to the Science Jr. and the fairing base, not to the Dawn engines

[Anonymous No.14819514]

>>14819427
>>14819435
>>14819447

More importantly, how many times can the transporter go back to the VAB before the road needs to be replenished with genuine Alabama river rock?

[Anonymous No.14819519]

>>14819514
inb4 they've been replacing it every time

[Anonymous No.14819520]

>>14819338
What's the plan after starship is in orbit, what's it do for how long then what?

[Anonymous No.14819523]

>>14819514
>4th Artemis 1 launch attempt scrubbed due to improper river rock smoothness
The entire path will need to be refurbished, NET 2024

[Anonymous No.14819540]

>>14819486
Florida coastal soil.

[Anonymous No.14819544]

>>14819505
I don't think it it's a weight issue, although carting around a rocket built on top of a pair of 500t+ SRBs can't make the job any easier. I think it's just that all soviet rockets were designed to be transported horizontally. Most of them were built in factories around Moscow before they took the long ride to Kazakhstan, so switching things around to vertical integration once they got there would have just added extra complexity where it wasn't needed.

>>14819493
I'm pretty sure the Baikonur trains are diesel but I've never heard anything one way or another.

[Anonymous No.14819577]

>>14818810
Actual talented people?

[Anonymous No.14819580]

So what happens when SLS does a RUD? Does NASA undergo a RUD as an organization all together?

[Anonymous No.14819585]

>>14819482
Sorry that'll be five years and 25-30 million dollars per production unit with production runs of four engines, thanks in advance for the check.

[Anonymous No.14819593]

>>14819482
PRODUCTION

IS

HARD

[Anonymous No.14819601]

>>14819580
Why are people so eager for the thing to explode? Yes, old space has done stupid shit but dismantling NASA isn't a good outcome either for the industry.

[Anonymous No.14819616]

>>14819601
Short sightedness, spite, malaise.

[Anonymous No.14819626]

>>14819601
>Why are people so eager for the thing to explode?
Because then maybe (maybe) they'll stop spending money on it

[Anonymous No.14819630]

>>14819523
And don't forget to change out the tracks on the transporter.
+$50 Million

[Anonymous No.14819635]

>>14819580
Probably depends how it RUDs, if it pops somewhere up in atmosphere where you can't really see much other than a flash, we will just get met with more platitudes of "this is why we test" and such. If it giga nukes on the pad or just after launch and there are high def cameras watching the cunt direct rip into a million flaming pieces then things might be different.

[Anonymous No.14819642]

>>14819601
>but dismantling NASA isn't a good outcome either for the industry.

What are you talking about, that would be the optimum outcome. Spend the NASA money on niggers or Ukraine or whatever since all NASA does is fuck around and waste everyone's time with bullshit. Let private industry get on with it thanks.

[Anonymous No.14819645]

>>14819601
Because the only way they'll stop wasting time and money on it, and the only chance NASA has to re-evaluate the way they do things is if the entire Artemis program fails in spectacular fashion.
Some people can be talked out of doing stupid things, they can understand reason and have enough mental flexibility to change course from things that don't work to adopt better practices. Others need to be kicked in the ass by life, they need to fail hard and suffer before the lesson breaks through their thick skulls.
Congress and NASA are the latter group, they will keep running with failing strategies until those strategies blow up in their face literally.

[Anonymous No.14819647]

>>14819601
>>14819626
I want these stupid, corrupt, oblivious fucking boomers who have been running this country in to the ground to be publicly humiliated in a way they can't bury or wriggle out of. I want them to suffer as I have suffered, even if only temporarily. I want their "gridigal heridage gondragdors :DDD" to be permanently fucking blackballed from future NASA money, up to and including Boeing and Aerojet Rocketdyne. I want a Constitutional amendment permanently banning Congress from requiring the use of specific parts or implementation details in ordering the development of government vehicles. They will not stop fucking up until it becomes absolutely clear to them that their approach is fundamentally wrong. I want that to happen as quickly as possible.

[Anonymous No.14819659]

>>14819647
This too, I genuinely hate boomers as a generation, and outside of specific individuals, I have developed a strong misanthropic urge to see the rest of them have a miserable final decade on this Earth before finally kicking off, since they've so thoroughly squandered everything their parents died and suffered for, and also permanently fucked things up for the next five generations after themselves.

[Anonymous No.14819666]

>>14819601
Because it would be kino.

[Anonymous No.14819674]

>>14819647
This is kind of capitalism case in point, when there's only like 1 company that can make space rockets, they can charge whatever they want for their supply; competitors coming on to the scene then have a benchmark they can try to undercut to win the competition

[Anonymous No.14819676]

>>14819674
There were significantly more aerospacd contractors in the 80s. The feds forced them all to merge in the 90s and here we are.

[Anonymous No.14819690]

did they finish adding that concrete berm around stage zero yet?

[Anonymous No.14819692]

>>14819674
>This is kind of capitalism case in point

Damn commie faggot you are fucking retarded. The GOVERNMENT forces a GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION to pick specific contractors to use specific parts from specific places. That's pretty much the fucking opposite of free market capitalism and it's honestly a fucking miracle SpaceX has managed to get the dribbles of money that it has and look what genuine competition has achieved.

[Anonymous No.14819700]

>>14819676
>There were significantly more aerospacd contractors in the 80s. The feds forced them all to merge in the 90s and here we are
I geuss that is the other side of the coin, when an industry is so possibly dangerous to employees and civilians, that you can't just have random Joe's running around launching rockets

[Anonymous No.14819702]

>>14819692
>has and look what genuine competition has achieved.
Yep, that's what I was referring to. The people without competition didn't really have comparison , but now that price and product comparison is coming about.

[Anonymous No.14819710]

>>14819601
just eager for selection to be faced

[Anonymous No.14819713]

Let's play a game /sfg/

I'll post some quotes and then you tell me if its from /x/ or /pol/

Ready? Go

>We've never been to the moon. We're never going to the moon. We cannot travel past low earth orbit because that's where the atmosphere ends and the firmament begins. The sooner you cucks realize this, the better.

[Anonymous No.14819715]

>>14819713
>The moon is a plasma phenomenon. It’s not a place. You can triangulate the approx position visibly with your eyes when the sun or moon is shining through a cloud. Both luminaries are relatively close by. We have def never “landed” on it.

[Anonymous No.14819716]

>>14819715
>Sb is the most explosive element on Earth. It makes primers go bang and is the reason munitions reach high speeds. Sb stores energy, defies fucking gravity when charged and is the real science behind hypersonic systems like satanii or FObs
aresenic antimony alloys

[Anonymous No.14819718]

Will the next attempt be successful or will the SLS menstruate all over the launch pad again?

[Anonymous No.14819723]

>>14819713
trick question, /pol/ was colonized by /x/ almost a decade ago

[Anonymous No.14819725]

>>14819723
Yep

[Anonymous No.14819737]

>>14819601
NASA isn't old space.

Death of old space will free NASA to do bigger things faster and more cost efficiently

[Anonymous No.14819739]

>>14819674
>This is kind of capitalism case in point, when there's only like 1 company that can make space rockets

There isn't a large enough market to support multiple companies that only make rocket engines.

None of these new small lift launch providers are making a profit, most of them will not exist in 5 years.

[Anonymous No.14819740]

>>14819463
>we all know this
Most cant tell the difference between H20 and H2, let alone CH4 and H2

[Anonymous No.14819741]

>>14819739
Of the small providers, which do you think will make it? Rocketlab is at the top of that list, and Astra is for sure at the bottom for me.

[Anonymous No.14819742]

>>14819700
That's not what it was. The cold war ended and people were expecting massive drop offs in defense spending (lol). It was intended to preserve past expertise.

[Anonymous No.14819765]

>>14819741
>Of the small providers, which do you think will make it?

Likely none unless nation states hand them money, starship rideshares will annihilate that market. Unless some of these smaller companies get the funding (somewhere in the 5+ billion dollar range I would guess) to develop a rocket platform equivalent to starship then they are boned. That's not the kind of money that just falls out of the sky. Also consider how far behind they already are, none of them have any experience beyond what is launching the equivalent of a toy rocket.

[Anonymous No.14819767]

>>14819765
Maybe that will change with Relativity, seems the vehicle size scales well since you don't need huge amounts of new tooling. Perhaps a bunch of these small fish need to band together and go all in on a big dumb booster to rival Starship. Seems everyone is trying to compete with Falcon while SpaceX is trying to make Falcon obsolete.

[Anonymous No.14819780]

>>14819767
It's not just about tooling to make muh big cylinder, that's probably one of the smaller factors. Look at starship, not much of that can be replaced with muh 3d proont, you still need gantry cranes, massive buildings, workers in cherry pickers fitting plumbing and electronics and sensors and bolts and heat shields and hydraulics and and and... Then there is the development of an engine, look how long raptor has been in development for and no one else has even started something that could come close. then there is the development of all the avionics, systems, coding, integrating that shit, figuring out HOW TO LAND A ROCKET (remember how long this took SpaceX?). They are all so far behind they might as well be SLS.

[Anonymous No.14819782]

>>14819741
-I would expect Rocket Lab, Relativity and Virgin Orbit to still be around as their own entity in 5 years.

-Firefly will survive making engines but they might not be a launch provider and might get bought by Northrop.

-ABL is effectively part of Lockheed.

-Phantom Space is run by Jim Cantrell, just look at what he did to Vector Launch.

-Astra will survive making engines but they might not be a launch provider.

-Skyrora, Orbex and PLD will be stillborn because Europe.

[Anonymous No.14819788]

>>14819782
>Astra will survive making engines
Haven't those specifically fucked over at least two of their launches?

[Anonymous No.14819805]

>>14819788
Buying Apollo Fusion was one of the smarter moves Astra made.

https://spacenews.com/astra-to-sell-electric-thrusters-to-airbus-oneweb-satellites/

[Anonymous No.14819806]

>>14819336
>Exhibit A here didn't even read the post he's replying to
>anon didnt read flat earther nonsense
Absolutely devastated by your response

[Anonymous No.14819815]

>>14819788
>>14819805
Those are actually the ONLY in house engine design Astra has since Rocket 4 is using Reaver for both stages and the Rocket 3 upper stage was scrapped.

[Anonymous No.14819820]

>>14819741
Firefly seems to be in the process of joining Orbital ATK in Northrup's gullet. They’ll do well for themselves as a wholly owned subsidiary.

Astra just inked a deal to provide engines to Airbus for building OneWeb satellites. A few ion thrusters won't save them when their rocket hustle implodes but it might make them worth buying.

Relativity could survive just as a 3d printing company. Being able to print the fuselage of a DC-8 in a single go attracts a long list of potential customers. Terran 1 should work, although working as a launch vehicle or an advertisement for printer capability is an open question.

Virgin Orbit has little to no ability to scale up their launcher, but they could endure in their present form if they can find the right sugar daddy who wants to buy launch capacity in a box. The UAE comes to mind but I think the Emirati have bigger ambitions than 300 kg/SSO.

ABL has a reasonable looking rocket, but being conventional isn't going to attract the interest you need to survive in a crowded market. Decent looking engine tech, though.

I like HyImpulse because they're developing hybrid propulsion system, but they're also based in the overly-bureaucratic EU. 500kg/LEO is too small to step on the toes of anyone who’s established (Vega), but that might mean they’re too small to thrive either.

Rocket Factory Augsburg has a boring ABL-like rocket being built in Germany. I don't envy their chances, but they have developed staged combustion rather than gas generator engines. 450 kg/GTO could give them an edge.

Isar Aerospace is another hopeful German launch vehicle manufacturer. (Is there something in the water over there?) They haven't done much beyond soak up venture capital and pencil a deal to launch from the old Diamant pad at Kourou.

AgniKul Cosmos and Skyroot are from India. I have no fucking clue about those guys but it'd be cool to see at least one Indian success story.

[Anonymous No.14819833]

>>14819820
The UAE already has access to SpaceX and did a Mars mission on Falcon 9.

[Anonymous No.14819837]

>>14819815
Astra is using a vac Reaver for the second stage?

[Anonymous No.14819846]

>>14819833
Which is why I think that they have ambitions that are too big to fit under the wing of a 747, but they do have an interest in growing their space presence and that's the kind of people Virgin would want to strike up a deeper relationship with.

I think pretty much all of the smaller small launchers are going to have a hard time in the next two years. Anything they could launch a bigger rocket could launch as a rideshare, and SpaceX is talking about trying for 100 Falcon 9 launches in 2023.

[Anonymous No.14819851]

>>14819837
Last I heard before leaving, yeah. They'd said it would be "pump fed" and use common dome with the same diameter as the first stage so that doesn't leave a whole lot of options given the giant fucking mess they had getting Reaver to so much as static fire at their test facility innadesert. I do not believe Astra's in-house chemical rocket engine dev teams can actually make a pump fed design from scratch and they lack the budget to go buy a different one.

[Anonymous No.14819866]

>>14819837
Rocket 4 will be powered by ion thrusters, it was revealed to me in a dream

[Anonymous No.14819869]

>>14819866
>TSTO ion thrusters
that would be a torch drive if it worked kek

[Anonymous No.14819878]

>>14819820
I'm applying to skyroot hope they hire me

[Anonymous No.14819886]

>>14819878
>4 stage solid rocket

[Anonymous No.14819888]

>>14819157
Hydrologgs no, Methaloggs yes :DD

[Anonymous No.14819892]

>>14819888
checked

[Anonymous No.14819897]

>>14819892
someone post the true 4ASS SRB design, the autophagic nuclear solid rocket

[Anonymous No.14819898]

>>14819897
I have that one saved too.

[Anonymous No.14819899]

>>14819892
Paraffin/nitrous is probably the simplest and cheapest propellant combo for someone looking to cobble together an orbital launch vehicle.

[Anonymous No.14819902]

>>14819899
Plus it sounds cool as fuck spinning up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8iOzQXyMA4

[Anonymous No.14819916]

>>14819902
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iekp6MHTXk
hybrid rockets are pretty neat

[Anonymous No.14819934]

Is it truly cheaper to throw away four RS-25s instead of refurbishing three?

[Anonymous No.14819951]

>>14819899
>>14819902
Oh shit this could actually work. N2O's freezing point is low enough this'd be a viable engine past Saturn for fixed burns.

>>14819934
It's cheaper than politically admitting we wasted 15 years trying to kill the space shuttle only to come up with a worse replacement.

[Anonymous No.14819963]

>>14819898
I don't understand how the exhaust could form a critical mass but the solid fuel wouldn't. The unburnt fuel is more dense than the exhaust.

[Anonymous No.14819965]

>>14819963
>4ASS

[Anonymous No.14819981]

>>14819963
uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh neutron moderators

[Anonymous No.14819983]

Oh well this explains why NASA designs using Thiokol SRBs are so autistically defended by Congress. They're the motors for literally our only land based ICBMs we have left.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman

[Anonymous No.14819985]

Thread has staged.

Ignition:
>>14819984
>>14819984
>>14819984
>>14819984

[Anonymous No.14820000]

>>14819983
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-35_Sentinel

[Anonymous No.14820010]

>>14819869
Literally a flashlight

[Anonymous No.14820327]

>>14819888
>88
Cosmic truth witnessed