/sfg/ - Spaceflight General

[Anonymous No.15477674]

Starliner is a piece of shit - edition

Previous >>15474296

[Anonymous No.15477679]

6 Days.
Physics will never be the same.

[Anonymous No.15477682]

https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/06/rocket-report-spacex-pushing-ahead-on-starbase-north-korea-launch-failure/

Small rockets
> North Korean orbital launch fails.
> Vega C to launch Korean satellite
> And another for Vega.
> Minotaur 4 returns for more.
> Latitude continues engine tests.

Medium rockets
> Falcon 9 rocket hits big milestone.
> H2A launch delayed until after August.
> Roscosmos to launch offensives instead of rockets?
> NASA targeting June three for cargo launch.

Heavy rockets
> SLS program spends a lot on propulsion
> SpaceX pushing forward hard on Starbase.

[Anonymous No.15477685]

https://spacenews.com/space-force-selects-new-leader-for-eastern-range/

[Anonymous No.15477686]

https://spacenews.com/google-leads-36-million-funding-round-for-pixxel/

> The company, with offices in the United States and India, is working on a constellation of hyperspectral imaging satellites. It launched its first pathfinder satellites in 2022 and is planning a constellation of 24 satellites it expects to deploy by 2025.

> Pixxel seeks to tap into growing interesting in hyperspectral data, which provides much greater spectral information but has long has a reputation for being difficult to work with. Pixxel is one of six companies that signed agreements with the National Reconnaissance Office in March for that agency’s Strategic Commercial Enhancements program for hyperspectral imagery. Under the agreements, NRO will assess the company’s technical and business plans, and later procure hyperspectral data for demonstrations.

[Anonymous No.15477688]

https://www.space.com/mars-express-livestream-esa-june-2023

3h to start of the stream

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qyVNqeJ6wQ

> On Friday, to celebrate the 20th birthday of ESA’s Mars Express, you’ll have the chance to get as close as it’s currently possible get to a live view from Mars. Tune in to be amongst the first to see new pictures roughly every 50 seconds as they’re beamed down directly from the Visual Monitoring Camera on board ESA’s long-lived and still highly productive martian orbiter.

>“This is an old camera, originally planned for engineering purposes, at a distance of almost three million kilometres from Earth – this hasn’t been tried before and to be honest, we’re not 100% certain it’ll work,” explains James Godfrey, Spacecraft Operations Manager at ESA’s mission control centre in Darmstadt, Germany.

>“But I’m pretty optimistic. Normally, we see images from Mars and know that they were taken days before. I’m excited to see Mars as it is now – as close to a martian ‘now’ as we can possibly get!’

[Anonymous No.15477694]

>>15477688
> The livestream will showcase images snapped by the probe's Visual Monitoring Camera (VMC), which was originally designed to monitor the separation of Beagle 2. Once it did that, the VMC was turned off — but it was turned back on in 2007 to snap imagery for education and outreach activities, and for science work as well.

>"We developed new, more sophisticated methods of operations and image processing, to get better results from the camera, turning it into Mars Express' eighth science instrument," VMC team member Jorge Hernández Bernal said in the same statement.
Related stories:

>Mars Express team members have spent the last few months preparing for today's livestream — for instance, developing the tools needed to get the VMC photos online as soon as possible.

> "This is an old camera, originally planned for engineering purposes, at a distance of almost 3 million kilometers [1.8 million miles] from Earth — this hasn’t been tried before and, to be honest, we're not 100% certain it'll work." James Godfrey, spacecraft operations manager at ESA's mission control center Darmstadt, Germany, said in the same statement.

>"But I’m pretty optimistic," he added. "Normally, we see images from Mars and know that they were taken days before. I'm excited to see Mars as it is now — as close to a Martian 'now' as we can possibly get!"

[Anonymous No.15477703]

[Anonymous No.15477707]

https://www.latitude.eu/logbook-posts/latitudes-rocket-engine-pushed-to-its-limits-in-new-test-campaign

Berger summary:
> Latitude continues engine tests. After an initial round of tests last winter, French launch startup Latitude is pushing its Navier rocket engine to the limits in a new test campaign. "The goal is to gather as much data as possible on it. To ensure this, we conduct tests every two to three days with several consecutive tests," said Olivier Lebrethon, chief technical officer of Latitude, in a news release.

>Working toward a launch attempt ... This first version of the 3D-printed rocket engine will pave the way for a second iteration of Navier, nine of which will power the first stage of the Latitude's rocket, Zephyr. The first launch of Zephyr is scheduled for the end of 2024, possibly from SaxaVord in Scotland or Kourou in French Guiana.

from the article from Latitudes website
> About Latitude
> Latitude is a pioneering French aerospace company with a passion for pushing the boundaries of space technologies to improve our future. Founded in 2019, Latitude specializes in the development of a space launch vehicle, named Zephyr. Driven by a commitment to excellence and a spirit of innovation, Latitude continually pushes the boundaries of what is possible, delivering reliable and cost-effective solutions to the growing smallsat market. Latitude dedications to research and development, along with strategic partnerships, enable the French aerospace company to offer groundbreaking solutions that empower satellite operators and facilitate access to space for a wide range of commercial, scientific, and governmental applications.

A french smallsat launcher

[Anonymous No.15477708]

>>15477703
focusing on whats important
btw the documentary "What is a woman" is available in full on Twitter
https://twitter.com/realDailyWire/status/1664424891372941312

[Anonymous No.15477717]

>>15477688
In the end its a good Thing that mars express happened instead of the larger european mars mission proposals (marsnet, intermarsnet, mars sample return) of the 90s

[Anonymous No.15477730]

>>15477682
>>15477685
>>15477686
>>15477688
>>15477694
>>15477703
>>15477707
Good posts Anon

[Anonymous No.15477733]

https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-27-2023

> Russian space agency Roscosmos is reportedly recruiting its own employees to form a volunteer battalion. Russian and social media sources amplified an advertisement for the “Uran” volunteer battalion that reportedly appeared on the internal Roscosmos website, which ostensibly only Roscosmos employees can access.[68] The possible recruitment of highly educated and likely limited specialists in the Russian aerospace field suggests that Russian officials may be prioritizing immediate force generation requirements over long-term human capital needs.

lol, the absolute state of pockmoc

[Anonymous No.15477741]

> SpaceX pushing forward hard on Starbase. The Orbital Index newsletter has a good roundup of activities happening at the Starbase facility in South Texas a little more than a month after Starship's debut flight. Work on the launch site has included the addition of a water-cooled steel flame plate, repairs needed to fill in the crater dug by Booster 7’s launch, and upgrades to the orbital launch mount and propellant tanks. The company also recently confirmed that Booster 9 and Ship 25 are the test articles intended for the next launch. The launch site and rocket will probably be ready to go in about two months.

>The bigger issues are regulatory ... The hardware is only one side of the coin, of course. Approval to launch still relies on a few factors outside the direct control of SpaceX, including a lawsuit in which environmental groups are suing the FAA for what they claim was a cursory environmental review of the launch site’s impact on the surrounding wildlife areas. SpaceX has joined the case as a defendant since it feels that the impact on Starship’s development timeline will hugely affect the company’s financial future. The FAA is also looking into the delayed action by Starship's flight termination system. So fall, maybe?

https://orbitalindex.com/archive/2023-05-31-Issue-220/

[Anonymous No.15477742]

What kind of rocket was this?

[Anonymous No.15477748]

>>15477742
is that based on a real rocket? The soviet N1 was a 4 stage moon rocket under development that got cancelled after 4 failed launches

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N1_(rocket)

[Anonymous No.15477749]

>>15477748
>>15477742
Everyday Astronaut released a video comparing Starship and N1 less than a day ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgqZMK22LEk

[Anonymous No.15477754]

>>15477694
Damn I'm probably gonna miss this, they're only streaming for an hour right?

[Anonymous No.15477786]

>>15477754
I don't know, didn't see a duration anywhere
the orbital parameters are:

Orbital parameters
Reference system: Areocentric (orbit around mars)
Eccentricity: 0.571
Periareion altitude: 298 km (185 mi)
Apoareion altitude: 10,107 km (6,280 mi)
Inclination: 86.3 degrees
Period: 7.5 hours

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Express

I tried to google a bit if there was some easy browser tool to visualize that, but didn't find one after some googling
either you have a geocentric or heliocentric orbit and you can't just input periareion and apoareion and I don't feel like calculating the actual parameters to change into different tools lol
but something like an hour sounds about right with an orbit like that and a period with 7.5h, maybe its even shorter for actual good pictures

well, there is pic related but that visualization seems misleading

[Anonymous No.15477789]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPy5x9r7kfM

here is a visualization I guess
the periareion (perigee) is really close

[Anonymous No.15477815]

>>15477733
That doesn't make any sense. Is there any reason to think the t.me/vchkogpu channel, which is the original source, is credible? Judging from a cursory look, using machine translation since my Russian is extremely limited, the channel seems dedicated to spreading various anti-Russian-government rumors and FUD.

The channel doesn't present any evidence except a picture of the supposed ad itself. Conveniently, the image cuts of just before the supposed contact telephone number (in the lower right-side corner)

[Anonymous No.15477816]

>>15477815
could be propaganda I guess

[Anonymous No.15477818]

Interview with Big-T
Maybe someone else hasn't seen this either given it has so few views.

[Anonymous No.15477819]

i for one appreciate the early thread space news aggregator

[Anonymous No.15477823]

>>15477818
I'm stupid
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScGt3LQNVrY

[Anonymous No.15477838]

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1664635380296032257

[Anonymous No.15477843]

>>15477838
>Musk just confirmed that Starship will switch to RP-1

[Anonymous No.15477845]

>>15477823
>>15477818
anything interesting in it?

[Anonymous No.15477846]

>>15477742
Not a real rocket design, I would assume. Why would they need fins at the bases of the the upper stages?

[Anonymous No.15477850]

>>15477838
Shouldn't the spacecraft be doing a retroburn rather than accelerating straight towards the Martian surface? Why are they firing the central non-vacuum-optimized engines while in space?
- nitpicker

[Anonymous No.15477851]

why can't they just do another uncrewed demonstration on july 21 and say "look, we have enough safety margin on the chutes and the battery/tape aren't real fire issues"

[Anonymous No.15477852]

>>15477846
Early SAMs like Nike did, so I assume the artist had seen local air defense batteries but not a real orbital rocket. That puts this as pre-Sputnik art where the R-7 and kin were deeply classified and this is what your average russkie artist imagined space rockets would look like.

[Anonymous No.15477856]

>>15477845
I haven't listened to it yet. If there was something really juicy it would have surfaced already.

[Anonymous No.15477861]

6th firing test of YF-100K, cumulative test run time now at 3300 seconds
http://www.news.cn/politics/2023-06/02/c_1129666113.htm

[Anonymous No.15477870]

>>15477850
they are full of faggots and are going to do a lithobraking manuever

[Anonymous No.15477881]

>>15477688
Euroids should keep watching Mars so they can see cities built by (formerly American) Martians.

[Anonymous No.15477885]

>>15477707
>french
>somehow think they can compete with F9 or Starship rideshare
Their eventual failure will be hilarious because they so richly deserve it.

[Anonymous No.15477886]

>>15477885
europoors can't do anything right

[Anonymous No.15477888]

>>15477870
based (based on the principle of destroying dangerous deviants, grifters and loafers for the good of society as a whole and for the future of humanity)

[Anonymous No.15477889]

>>15477885
résultats sur la rhétorique

[Anonymous No.15477890]

>>15477886
Future Martians and Belters will wonder why blacks are called Africans despite predominantly coming from Europe

[Anonymous No.15477892]

>>15477889
Behold! A box full of European results!

[Anonymous No.15477899]

>>15477892
Zephyr est réel, tu l'as vu à Reims

[Anonymous No.15477902]

https://www.boeing.com/

[Anonymous No.15477908]

>>15477902
dios mio, un sobrecoste

[Anonymous No.15477924]

>>15477902
"Here at Boing, showcasing future sex criminals and gender monstrosities is more important than spaceflight and the safety of our airliners. Go suck a dick--with Pride!"

[Anonymous No.15477932]

Why did NASA bother with SLS?

And why was SLS so expensive when it reused Shuttle components?

[Anonymous No.15477933]

>>15477932
politics and corruption

[Anonymous No.15477958]

>>15477674
can we please leave disparaging remarks out of the OP. Keep it professional. Just calling the thread after Starliner is mocking enough

[Anonymous No.15477959]

>>15477932
yeah, I'm going to have to see spaceX selling rides on starship for 2 million before I accept that $13 a kilogram figure.

[Anonymous No.15477960]

Imagine being an astronaut that's supposed to go on Starliner.

[Anonymous No.15477961]

>>15477932
Jobs. It's sad too, because SLS would be fine if it could hit a four launches per year cadence.

[Anonymous No.15477962]

>>15477932
We don't know the cost of Starship. SpaceX numbers can't be trusted as they have been known to lie severely

[Anonymous No.15477964]

>>15477962
This, also why would SpaceX reduce the launch cost a lot when there's no competition?

[Anonymous No.15477967]

stinky feet have entered the thread

[Anonymous No.15477972]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qyVNqeJ6wQ

live now, 5min to first image

[Anonymous No.15477976]

>>15477850
you would want to burn off your speed by aerobreaking, so not really
just some short corrective burn following orbital insertion that could theoretically be in any spatial direction
retrograde burn can look like prograde if the camera is moving away relative to the spacecraft anyway
Also, vacuum Raptors aren't gimballed (last time I checked), so sea-level raptors might be burning to provide more steering and take advantage of Oberth effect by maximalizing thrust at periapsis
that said, I don't think the guy put that much thought into it

[Anonymous No.15477982]

>>15477972
mars

[Anonymous No.15477983]

first image, very overexposed
the later images will be better

[Anonymous No.15477984]

>>15477972
it's been more than 5 minutes

[Anonymous No.15477985]

second pic

[Anonymous No.15477988]

[Anonymous No.15477989]

>>15477985
5th

[Anonymous No.15477990]

>>15477989
This is pretty cool

[Anonymous No.15477992]

>>15477989
7th

[Anonymous No.15477993]

>>15477972
>chat full of thai, russian, and chinese spam

[Anonymous No.15477997]

this is the state of the ess in 2023

[Anonymous No.15477998]

>>15477992
13th or 14th

[Anonymous No.15478001]

>>15477997
give them some credit. this is a significant step up over mariner 9. Europe is easily on par with mid 70s american mars exploration

[Anonymous No.15478003]

>>15477998
white spot is high altitude cloud (50-60 km) with its shadow as dark spot above.

[Anonymous No.15478004]

>>15478001
even the saudis have a mars orbiter and it has better cameras

[Anonymous No.15478005]

>>15478004
this is a 20 year old engineering camera

[Anonymous No.15478009]

>>15478005
and where is their present engineering camera?

[Anonymous No.15478011]

>>15478009
probably on the trace gas orbiter, but even that one is 7 years old

[Anonymous No.15478013]

bad Earth weather stops Mars signal reception - rain and clouds over Madrid antenna.

[Anonymous No.15478015]

Starlink available in Mozambique

[Anonymous No.15478017]

>>15478013
Atmosphere hindering operations again.

[Anonymous No.15478020]

>The mission was scheduled to launch in July 2020,[7] but was postponed to 2022.[8] The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine has caused an indefinite delay of the programme, as the member states of the ESA voted to suspend the joint mission with Russia;[9] in July 2022, ESA terminated its cooperation on the project with Russia.[10] As of May 2022, the launch of the rover is not expected to occur before 2028 due to the need for a new non-Russian landing platform.[3][11]
why even bother lmao

[Anonymous No.15478021]

>>15477823
>>15477845
So far talking details about how they want to profit off StarShip dropping launch price. ie Tugs not using hydrazine and designed for cost.
Is not afraid of multiple starts in space.

[Anonymous No.15478024]

>>15478015
Boas notícias

[Anonymous No.15478025]

>>15478013
>>15478017
we need more DSN antennae

[Anonymous No.15478029]

>>15478021
interesting, I'm always kind of wary of interviews like this that mostly talk about peoples backround or this or that random ass shit

[Anonymous No.15478030]

just look at it lol americans will be throwing rocks at this pos as it lands

[Anonymous No.15478032]

https://www.rfa.space/280-seconds-rfa-completes-full-duration/
>Rocket Factory Augsburg AG (RFA) has successfully hot fired its upper stage for a full duration of 280 seconds

[Anonymous No.15478033]

fucked up image

[Anonymous No.15478035]

>>15478033
guess the cgi machine broke
mars is flat

[Anonymous No.15478038]

>>15477962
Likely, not even SpaceX knows the true launch costs of Starship yet, at least not with any good accuracy, because it's still a highly experimental system and they don't yet have enough operational data to draw conclusions.

If I'm not mistaken, in theory the Space Shuttle could have reduced launch costs more than it did in practice.

[Anonymous No.15478041]

>>15478025
latest

[Anonymous No.15478042]

>>15477885
There are likely customers who want to buy European for their launch needs, particularly, I think, the French government.

[Anonymous No.15478044]

>>15478042
pretty much exclusively lmao
nice sustainable market you got there

[Anonymous No.15478045]

>>15478044
> sustainable market
Well, the French government isn't going anywhere anytime soon I think

[Anonymous No.15478050]

>>15477707
>LEO - 100kg
>SSO - 80kg

>French Art
>Zephyr, our groundbreaking space launcher, seamlessly melds the rich French industrial heritage with advanced aerospace ingenuity, powering Europe's space ambitions.

>some of the renders have the company socials printed on the rocket
lol

[Anonymous No.15478051]

>>15478045
europe is a dead continent, the state of france may continue but what it does in space or anywhere else will be on par with what africa is doing.

[Anonymous No.15478075]

>>15478038
>If I'm not mistaken, in theory the Space Shuttle could have reduced launch costs more than it did in practice.
I'm convinced the space shuttle could have solved ~50% of its problems by having been designed originally to use kerolox. Then it wouldn't need foam on the tanks. no foam = no foam strikes = cheaper, faster, and less frequent repairs + no columbia disaster.
the remaining 50% could have been solved by making the cockpit an escape capsule and telling the army if they wanted to do single orbit missions they could land back one spaceport to the west.

[Anonymous No.15478080]

>>15477960
I'd be relieved at the delay and hope to get reassigned to a future Dragon flight

[Anonymous No.15478081]

>>15478030
>In June 2023, a Roscosmos lander... was due to deliver the ESA Rosalind Franklin rover to the Martian surface.
>On 17 March 2022, ESA suspended the mission due to the ongoing invasion of Ukraine by Russia. ESA expects that a restart of the mission, using a new non-Russian landing platform, is unlikely to launch before 2028.
Look at all the positive relationships that Russia has destroyed.

[Anonymous No.15478083]

>>15478045
Europe is trending toward a cultural theme park with no real economy

[Anonymous No.15478084]

>>15478051
I love when Americans try to shit on Europe

[Anonymous No.15478090]

>>15477823
>When do you think we'll be back on the moon
>This decade. Late this decade
Artemis 3 brothers...

[Anonymous No.15478095]

>>15478013
>>15478003
>>15477998
>>15477989
lmao imagine fall for these blatant CGI shots, science golems are completely brainwashed

[Anonymous No.15478103]

>boeing is 107 years old
what the fuuuuuuuuuuuck

[Anonymous No.15478108]

>>15478083
EU GDP is still growing, despite just having been overtaken by China

I think China's population is over 3 times that of the EU so it's understandable that they've overtaken the EU

[Anonymous No.15478114]

>>15478084
>try to
yurops are getting mauled itt

[Anonymous No.15478149]

Amerilards coping ITT

[Anonymous No.15478154]

if europe was actually concerned about the state of their space industry then they'd actually do something about it

[Anonymous No.15478166]

What does /sfg/ think of Varda space?

[Anonymous No.15478182]

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXrzLaWJ2xs
SEXO SEXO SEXOOOOOOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.15478222]

>>15478149
Post domestic manned spacecraft

[Anonymous No.15478225]

>>15478114
Enjoy getting mauled for real by a pack of rabid city *******

[Anonymous No.15478231]

>>15477962
Fuck off, you absolute mong. We can't trust SpaceX numbers, but we can trust your completely uninformed speculation? Go drown yourself.

[Anonymous No.15478233]

[Anonymous No.15478235]

>>15478231
kill yourself you absolutely fucking delusional faggot.

[Anonymous No.15478239]

>>15478075
all hydrogen rockets could have 50% of it's problems solved by switching to kerosene or other sensible fuels. As for the shuttle they also could've made it unmanned.

[Anonymous No.15478240]

Shut the fuck up

[Anonymous No.15478247]

>>15478231
if you were alive in the 70s you would have eaten up the space shuttle costing 9mil per launch

[Anonymous No.15478250]

>>15478154
like Boeing would do something about the state of their company?
not how it works

[Anonymous No.15478252]

https://twitter.com/KenKirtland17/status/1664512425914163201

[Anonymous No.15478253]

>>15478235
reasons Space X's claims are credible: world's leading launch provider by an order of magnitude, created the world's first large scale internet constellation, first reusable spacecraft
reasons your claims are credible: ????
keep seething into the void

[Anonymous No.15478257]

>>15478252
cygnus would do alot better if it was allowed to ride on falcon 9

[Anonymous No.15478259]

>>15478252
https://twitter.com/BellikOzan/status/1664619669867855872

[Anonymous No.15478261]

>>15478259

[Anonymous No.15478263]

Cygnus has had 18 succesful missions, thats quite a lot in total

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_(spacecraft)

[Anonymous No.15478266]

>>15478253
you can acknowledge that spacex is by far the most successful space company and at the same time point out that they wildly overestimate what they are capable of achieving.

[Anonymous No.15478267]

>satellites launch on whatever rocket they want
>cargo and crew vehicles dont
strange dynamic

[Anonymous No.15478271]

>>15478154
we are, but are minimum 10 years behind and everything takes 2 times longer at minimum
getting anything done in Europe is pain

[Anonymous No.15478273]

https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/06/to-keep-starliner-flying-boeing-must-make-some-hard-choices/

> Although Reiley said in 2009 the company was making a "substantial investment" in the development of Starliner, then known as CST-100, multiple sources told Ars that was not the case. Instead, Boeing for a long time "nickel-and-dimed" the time engineers spent working on Starliner. This was partly due to congressional underfunding of the commercial crew program but also because Boeing did not want to put skin in the game.

>

This has been a poor decision in retrospect because, due to the fixed-price nature of its contract with NASA, Boeing is largely responsible for cost overruns and losses due to ongoing delays. The company now essentially has three options, none of which is particularly appealing.

so the skeleton crew speculation was true I guess
or maybe this was known previously already

[Anonymous No.15478275]

we're supposed to focus on the spartan program first ... you'll never make it to deep space if nobody surivves.

[Anonymous No.15478278]

>>15478266
cost to SpaceX or price to customer?

[Anonymous No.15478281]

>>15478267
aren't they designed as a part of the vehicle itself
not payload in a fairing, but a system on top of the rocket that is integrated
you can't just put a starliner on a falcon 9 just like that, it would necessitate some specific engineering

[Anonymous No.15478285]

>>15478253
>world's leading launch provider by an order of magnitude, created the world's first large scale internet constellation, first reusable spacecraft
those are independently verifiable facts. Here's some SpaceX claims for example:
-First Cargo Starship on Mars in 2020
-Elon saying the first flight would be in a few weeks 2 years ago
-generally any date they give is completely wrong.

[Anonymous No.15478286]

>>15478275

without our work there will never be true space exploration ... why are you funding anything over us?

[Anonymous No.15478287]

>>15478257
Flight 20 is scheduled to go on a falcon 9 in November

[Anonymous No.15478288]

>>15478240
You forgot to reply to someone sweetie.

[Anonymous No.15478290]

>>15478286

if you do not fund our medicine all of humanity could collapse ... your space travel is second.

[Anonymous No.15478295]

>>15478287
i checked and you're right. now we're getting somewhere.

[Anonymous No.15478306]

>>15478285
And yet they are effectively 5-10 years ahead of every space company realistically speaking, wake me up when any else on this shit rock puts in enough effort to make them sweat.

[Anonymous No.15478313]

>>15478306
so we agree that spacex, while good, cannot be trusted to provide accurate numbers as to what starship will eventually cost per pound?

[Anonymous No.15478316]

I have an opportunity to print out some large posters for very cheap today. Can I get some high res space kino? Photos and drawings welcome.

[Anonymous No.15478317]

>>15478313
Sure but this is like whinging about nothing because even the worst estimates lap every other shitty space company on the planet. And I don't even disagree, they probably lowball their launch numbers to look good when you account for various overheads but it doesn't matter because the entire space industry is in mud huts, SpaceX will probably establish near monopoly control of space within 2050 and who cares about all this bullshit.

[Anonymous No.15478321]

>>15478225
>*******
This is 4chan, you don't need to self-censor

[Anonymous No.15478323]

>>15478316
lol the new mexico colony seems to be coming along well

[Anonymous No.15478348]

https://twitter.com/Starlink/status/1664717672104198147
>Starlink set an altitude and speed record for use in-flight during Starship’s first flight test, providing connectivity at 123,600+ feet and while traveling at Mach 1.7!

[Anonymous No.15478353]

>>15478348
I can't wait to shitpost while going into orbit on Starship
I will be dunking on Euroids and cost plusers
The future is looking bright

[Anonymous No.15478356]

>>15478348
If they wanted to maintain connectivity in orbit then this is quite a cope tweet.

[Anonymous No.15478357]

>>15478356
Are you fucking retarded? They have thousands of satellites "maintaining connectivity" 24/7.

[Anonymous No.15478360]

>>15478281
>you can't just put a starliner on a falcon 9 just like that, it would necessitate some specific engineering
you can, just need an adapter

plenty on capsules flew on more than one rocket
Mercury on Redstone and Atlas, Apollo on Saturn 1, 1B and 5 (and Little Joe if you can count that), Orion on Delta IV Heavy and SLS

[Anonymous No.15478363]

>>15478360
Orion DIVH was actually pretty cool, from a spaceflight kitbash point of view.

[Anonymous No.15478369]

>>15478363
yeah
it looked far less janky than Starliner-Atlas V

[Anonymous No.15478370]

>>15478369
Truly

[Anonymous No.15478374]

>>15478290
My autism is pretty much solely focused on trains and rockets, but Volvo’s 18 wheeler is pretty sweet

[Anonymous No.15478393]

>>15478266
2X is not "wildly" optimistic. Thats better than industry standards by a wide margin

[Anonymous No.15478422]

>>15478286
Threadly reminder the Mars landings will be livestreamed straight into your brain if you are vaxxed. For everybody else there will be the usual CGI on your home screen.

[Anonymous No.15478435]

>>15478422
Sounds based.
Will I receive better signal if I also get vaxxed for flu?
I want best reception from my local 5G tower for the occasion.

[Anonymous No.15478440]

>>15478306
>And yet they are effectively 5-10 years ahead of every space company realistically speaking
so what? I didn't deny or affirm this. All I'm saying is that SpaceX is lying more than NASA and perhaps more than any aerospace company

[Anonymous No.15478445]

>>15478321
sci is known for banning people for such things

[Anonymous No.15478447]

>>15478435
The more the merrier.

[Anonymous No.15478450]

>>15478422
AI and neuralink type devices scare the shit out of me. So far I have never been scared of these types of technologies. The end is nigh

[Anonymous No.15478454]

>>15478154
Europe has Ariane... better than nothing

[Anonymous No.15478456]

>>15478154
They're doing things, there's Ariane 6, Themis/NEXT, and a few private companies.

[Anonymous No.15478473]

Ariane 6 and Vulcan are failures

[Anonymous No.15478474]

>been living on my yacht for quite a while now because fuck rent and fuck waging
>making just enough to get by scalping and trading
>slumming it on 4g, coverage is OK but it's overall pretty shit and could really do with better coverage and speeds
>hype for starlink
>finally they release marine package
>dish is inexplicably thousands and thousands of dollars
>FOUR HUNDRED + AUD A MONTH FOR 50GB

what the actual fuck Elon

[Anonymous No.15478482]

>>15478474
The delusional muskrat finally realizes thunderfoot was right

[Anonymous No.15478485]

>>15478474
>monopoly sets prices high
wow no way

[Anonymous No.15478490]

>>15478485
They have a monopoly in rural buttfuck Australia too but the package prices and hardware are a fraction of the cost

>>15478482
I'm team bozos now, gib kuiper connection

[Anonymous No.15478491]

>>15478450
https://youtu.be/eJK1gLHbOxA?t=1136
https://youtu.be/52dVfhgt_T4?t=694

[Anonymous No.15478497]

>>15478491
thanks for the entertaining videos schizo

[Anonymous No.15478521]

Absolutely based

[Anonymous No.15478523]

>>15478521
So both reusable launchpads and boosters are out now.

[Anonymous No.15478525]

>>15477679
Wut?

[Anonymous No.15478529]

>>15478525
>he doesn't know

[Anonymous No.15478549]

>>15478474
you fucking retard, that's like 1/30th the cost of alternative boat internet plans.

[Anonymous No.15478553]

>>15478521
>>15478523
It's for post launch aborts not hot staging.

[Anonymous No.15478559]

>>15478553
The TWR of a fully loaded Starship is much, much lower than the TWR of a half-empty booster right?

[Anonymous No.15478560]

>>15478549
Yeah, but it's not cheaper than his basic 4G cellular package so its obviously a scam and a failure

[Anonymous No.15478562]

>>15478553
we don't even know that that's where it mounts

[Anonymous No.15478563]

>>15478521
If you look at soviet rockets they have way more room for the gases to went out. That looks way too tight by comparison.

[Anonymous No.15478568]

>>15478440
Making underestimation on timelines is nothing new in the space industry, if your definite proof of SpaceX being the biggest liars in the space industry is due to how they underestimate how much time things actually ends up taking then I have news for you small child

[Anonymous No.15478574]

>>15478525
Lurk more and get lapped by my superior tape outgassing drive

[Anonymous No.15478578]

>>15478549
I know that nigger I'm just seething that it's insanely more expensive than the land based option when it's literally the same fucking thing.

[Anonymous No.15478579]

>>15478574
If thats your taste in 'women', youre a faggot

[Anonymous No.15478591]

>>15477679
The butt hurt if this works will be immeasurable.

[Anonymous No.15478593]

>>15478591
If what works? Also stop

[Anonymous No.15478604]

>>15478593
There's a payload on Transporter-8 with a propellantless electric thruster unit to test that guy's physics theory called Quantized Inertia. The thruster is built by IVO US and the satellite by Rogue Space.
https://twitter.com/memcculloch

[Anonymous No.15478607]

>>15478474
There's no 4G at sea/ocean.

[Anonymous No.15478611]

>>15478474
You should start your own Internet megaconstellation

[Anonymous No.15478625]

https://spacenews.com/google-leads-36-million-funding-round-for-pixxel/

Is this legal? Google is an American company investing in Indian space industry (defense military/itar restriction?)

[Anonymous No.15478637]

>>15478625
We should raise hell about it.

[Anonymous No.15478646]

>>15478604
Oh so its a memetech

[Anonymous No.15478650]

>>15478625
ITAR doesn't apply if it's not a US company
also looks like they're only building satellites and not rockets in which case nobody cares
DoD only cares about weaponizable technology

[Anonymous No.15478662]

>>15478525
>>15478574
>>15478591

This is actually super neat. I had never heard of this guy or his research before. Hopefully his experiment produces some interesting results.

[Anonymous No.15478665]

>>15478579
Cope incel

[Anonymous No.15478677]

>>15478665
Cute

[Anonymous No.15478683]

>>15478650
Google is a US company.

[Anonymous No.15478690]

>>15478683
ok? they're investing in an indian company
DoD doesn't care if google is stealing an indian company's rocket tech
they're not making rockets anyway

[Anonymous No.15478709]

>>15478690
But US is the only country in the world that can legally make rockets. Others are either stealing american technologies or are a threat to american democracy and world peace.

[Anonymous No.15478723]

>>15478578
You have the privilege of subsidizing mankind's expansion into the solar system. It's the next best thing to owning SpaceX stock.
Seriously though because it's a moving base station, it's more of a hassle for the satellites to deal with

[Anonymous No.15478728]

>>15478474
Which design is your boat?

[Anonymous No.15478738]

Feel free to roast me if this question is stupid.

From what I understand, many launches depend on the weather being clear enough to launch.
For reentry, is this also an issue?
Like for example, does SpaceX have to wait for perfect weather for not just the launch, but also the landing zone?
If not, then why does weather have to be so perfect for launch, but matters less when landing?

[Anonymous No.15478741]

>>15478690
They're investing in a foriegn nations ballistic missile system. Its not good

[Anonymous No.15478745]

>>15478738
>For reentry, is this also an issue?
Yes. SpaceX has delayed more than a few launches because the downrange weather was too choppy to permit a safe landing. RTLS flights are usually fine since the booster is just turning around to head back to the same place it launched from.

[Anonymous No.15478759]

>>15478521
Is this confirmed?
Starship hot staging would be insanely based

[Anonymous No.15478760]

>>15478553
>It's for post launch aborts
they wouldn't be working on it right now if that were the case

[Anonymous No.15478768]

>>15478759
just for emergencies. hot staging and reusability don't really go together

[Anonymous No.15478773]

>>15478768
why would you need some fancy set up for "emergencies" ? Just make it all work properly in the first place

[Anonymous No.15478776]

https://twitter.com/Starlink/status/1664758466177810432
Even Inuits can shitpost now

[Anonymous No.15478782]

>>15478776
The canadian government pays for the enjoyment of injuns
New skidoo every year for them

[Anonymous No.15478783]

>>15478662
It's the only propulsion memetech I've seen follow a vaguely normal development process.
>"hey that's weird"
>hypothesis
>initial experiments
>theory
>more lab work
>grant funded research (DARPA)
>replication and refinement by third parties
>commercialization (IVO) and parallel continued lab work
>ground testing in vacuum chambers
>now a test flight
Even if it does work the fact that it needs super high voltage and only gets ~0.05N/W specific thrust means you still need fancy low-alpha power supplies or a rocket tug to get out of LEO in any reasonable timeframe, so it's not magic.

[Anonymous No.15478803]

>>15478723
>Seriously though because it's a moving base station, it's more of a hassle for the satellites to deal with

Absolute bs, compared to the satellite moving at LEO speeds it makes fuck all difference if you are sitting still or moving at 6 knots, besides the RV version is for use while moving and that package is like a quarter of the price. People were using the regular RV model on their boats too before Elon starting jewing so it's pretty obvious you don't need the gorillion dollar special snowflake hardware either. It's a pretty shit business decision honestly because every motherfucker who lives out of their boat, which is quite a lot, would instantly pony up if the monthly connection cost was the same as the RV package, even if they were still jewing on the hardware price. With it priced as it is basically no one will buy it except the sailing influencer channels, its just too much to swallow.

>>15478728
30ft Bruce Roberts, bermuda sloop

[Anonymous No.15478806]

Will TIG welding on Mars still require inert gassed to stop oxidation? I know oxygen isnt nearly as abundant but it could still be an issue no? Asking because I wanna weld for SpaceX on Mars and theres enough time to get better

[Anonymous No.15478807]

>>15478806
There is zero free oxygen in the Martian atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.15478808]

>>15478807
that won't be true when we're done with it.

[Anonymous No.15478810]

>>15478803
>30ft Bruce Roberts, bermuda sloop
Nice

[Anonymous No.15478811]

>>15478806
No shielding gas will be required.
Also make sure to not get those too hot they might explode from air pressure inside

[Anonymous No.15478819]

>>15478808
based

[Anonymous No.15478825]

>>15478768
>just for emergencies
I don't understand how this could possibly work. The TWR on starship is much lower than that of superheavy.

[Anonymous No.15478828]

>>15478825
>The TWR on starship is much lower than that of superheavy
The booster will either shut off its engines or explode eliminating thrust in both cases. also starship will have 9 engines.

[Anonymous No.15478837]

>>15478811
Small project already finished, I'm looking at making a fire pit next and working on my tube welds, I unfortunately suck at aluminum

[Anonymous No.15478859]

>>15478273
Sounds like they want to keep StarLiner around.
https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1664376572915118081?s=20

[Anonymous No.15478861]

>>15478859
Also anons should listen to this call.

[Anonymous No.15478864]

https://twitter.com/mcrs987/status/1664822709400862721?t=F2jdSFiktTRC6KDYVV_cuA&s=19

Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.15478868]

>>15478864
on what?

[Anonymous No.15478869]

>>15477851
Just because the capsule doesn't fail, does not mean these are not flight critical issues that could cause loss of the capsule in off nominal situations or even expected situations that differ from the test flight. There will always be the fear that one thing being unaccounted for will cause an issue. After the o-ring failure during the shuttle program they will never operate a crew vehicle with something outside of the allowed range ever again. If the tape doesn't meet flammability standards it will be replaced, same with the soft links.

I worked certification for aircraft, and same thing, sometimes they retest a material and it exposes that the flammability performance was marginal, or the original test was lucky to pass. That can result in the grounding of planes, even if it is something like a seat cushion.

[Anonymous No.15478870]

>>15478864
there will have to be some form of les on ss surely?

[Anonymous No.15478871]

>>15478864
>blue fox

[Anonymous No.15478872]

>>15478870
>les
>on the moon
what did he mean by this

[Anonymous No.15478874]

>>15477851
its a 3 chute design that can work with only 2 chutes. problem is with only 2 chutes the cords are well below the safety factors allowed. then it might apollo 1 on the insulation tape.

[Anonymous No.15478876]

>>15478872
i mean generally getting away from the tons of propellant in any setting. will the faa allow it?

[Anonymous No.15478877]

is it true that a starship could deliver 2000 nuclear warheads?

[Anonymous No.15478878]

>>15478876
>in any setting
There is nowhere to escape to on the moon.

[Anonymous No.15478880]

>>15478877
Sure.
Why would you want to do that though?

[Anonymous No.15478883]

>>15478878
let me rephrase; if regulations demand it on earth, is there a way of launching humans on ss with a les that doesn't require a major redesign? if the les isn't required, what successful launch and land record do you think ss will have to achieve before its considered safe enough to not need one?

[Anonymous No.15478886]

>>15478883
>is there a way of launching humans on ss with a les that doesn't require a major redesign
depends oon your definition of les see >>15478521 for something that might or might not fit it.
>>15478883
>if the les isn't required, what successful launch and land record do you think ss will have to achieve before its considered safe enough to not need one
zero. there is no such requirement see the space shuttle

[Anonymous No.15478890]

>>15478880
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8uG7wQGVXA

[Anonymous No.15478891]

>>15478886
the sts was at best an experimental govt project. i mean a vehicle regulated in a similar way to commercial aircraft with paying passengers. just playing devils advocate.

[Anonymous No.15478898]

>>15477885
It doesn't really matter to them, they're going to support their own industries whether or not it makes economic sense because it still makes strategic sense.

[Anonymous No.15478900]

Here's the RFA static fire video. Don't see it in this thread https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXUR4m6SOB0

[Anonymous No.15478906]

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1664832049516097537

[Anonymous No.15478910]

>>15478906
pretty sick
also TWO jarvis tanks? jeff must be coming in a full day a week now

[Anonymous No.15478911]

>>15478906
results over rhetoric

[Anonymous No.15478924]

maybe if someone filmed the 4bn per launch sls crashing into the ocean and set it side by side with the f9 the public would finally understand how wasteful disposable rockets are. i was an age far older than i should have been before i realised they take all that engineering and man hours just to chuck most of it in the sea.

[Anonymous No.15478925]

>>15478911
Almost forgot about that lmao

[Anonymous No.15478926]

>>15478911
Falcon has now had more consecutive successful landings than any other rocket ever has had consecutive successful launches

[Anonymous No.15478928]

>>15478926
meanwhile not one other space agency or company has flown a reusable first stage

[Anonymous No.15478933]

>>15478910
yeah still looks like trash though kek

[Anonymous No.15478934]

>SpaceX has publicly indicated that the development cost for Falcon 9 launch vehicle was approximately $300 million. Additionally, approximately $90 million was spent developing the Falcon 1 launch vehicle which did contribute to some extent to the Falcon 9. for a total of $390 million.
the best example of of engineering this century?

[Anonymous No.15478936]

>>15478934
at spacex in particular engineering and production is deeply intertwined.
every 60 million dollar rocket built feeds into design so this is likely a significant lowball

[Anonymous No.15478937]

>>15477932
You'll be glad they did when starbase gets shut down for environmental reviews.

[Anonymous No.15478938]

>>15478936
even if it were 1bn its significantly lower than anything oldspace can come up with with a far greater ability.

[Anonymous No.15478940]

>>15478883
if they moved the lox header tank somewhere other than the nose they could stick a fairly standard capsule in the top and use the same style of launch escape as every other vehicle.

[Anonymous No.15478945]

>>15478940
the whole cargo/passang bay as a giant dragon with the propellant as the trunk may work. it's one more coupling with some solids.

[Anonymous No.15478946]

>>15478940
>>15478883
quick mspaint explanation diagram

[Anonymous No.15478952]

>>15478945
before massfags chip in ill add that humans and their needs don't weigh much so a large crew capacity ss could sacrifice a fair bit of tonnage to introduce a les. cargo and tanker variants could of course fuck this off.

[Anonymous No.15478956]

>>15478945
>>15478952
stupid idea
>>15478940
>>15478946
good idea except superdraco LES instead of tractor style solid cuck rocket

[Anonymous No.15478961]

>>15478956
Just use all the Raptors and RVacs at once as the LES.

[Anonymous No.15478964]

>>15478956
>stupid idea
how are 10 plus passengers going to squeeze into a tiny fore capsule with appropriate seating etc?

[Anonymous No.15478966]

>>15478961
so you can still be sitting on top of all the fuel in starship as superheavy (or possibly starship itself) is exploding under you?

[Anonymous No.15478967]

>>15478961
what's the ignition time and time to full thrust on an emergency burn?

[Anonymous No.15478968]

>>15478966
Just power through it.

[Anonymous No.15478969]

>>15478964
it's a bigger capsule than dragon which can hold almost 10 people and it only needs to support them for like an hour or two until recovery during landing or liftoff.
>>15478966
sort of. the starship survived the booster exploding under it.
if it explodes though it's over.
that's why hypergolic LES on small capsule at the tip with standard ablative heat shield is a good idea.

[Anonymous No.15478970]

>>15478969
That's retarded. Shartship is supposed to be hauling up a hundred passengers at a time eventually.

[Anonymous No.15478973]

>>15478969
again playing devil's advocate; doesn't this severely reduce the crew per ship or has sx moved past the 100 people per crewed launch "plan" (i say "plan" because this was only early speculative design work and likely hype)

[Anonymous No.15478978]

>>15478970
>>15478973
i guess you could synergize with the HLS design use something like those ch4 ox thrusters for abort fed from the header tanks in the nose.
then pop out the worlds biggest parachutes and have the worlds biggest ablative heat shield at the bottom.
gonna be very heavy though.

[Anonymous No.15478980]

this is all mental masturbation however.
realistically speaking starship will never have any detachable abort gimmick.
it's just not worth it over making the ship more reliable.

[Anonymous No.15478981]

>>15478978
i guess once the work is done on the main rocket variants aren't so hard to do. have a crew launch to leo version with the remaining being cargo then transfer them to a mars transfer/land/return.
these things will be relatively cheap af so you have many second stages of different types and put them on the more complex and refurbishment heavy boosters.

[Anonymous No.15478982]

>>15478980
hi, I'm a time traveler. I just got here from January 27th 1985. I agree, space travel is a solved issue. rockets are so reliable now. there is no need for launch escape systems with rockets this reliable. now I'm going to go back to my time and watch space shuttle challenger launch.

[Anonymous No.15478985]

>>15478982
fuck I go the year wrong

[Anonymous No.15478986]

>>15478980
military jets are far more reliable that rockets and have ejection seats. airliners are designed with multiple failsafes and can glide to a landing before deploying other life saving measures. idk why you'd leave these out of mature rockets.

[Anonymous No.15478989]

>>15478967
Hypergolics bros...it's our time to shine.

[Anonymous No.15478993]

>>15478521
>Thousands of tons of fully fuelled spacecraft being supported by fence posts
Imagine the buckling at max-Q

[Anonymous No.15478994]

>>15478989
>raptor but with extra valves to dump an emergency hypergolic mix into the injectors in case it all goes sideways

[Anonymous No.15478996]

>>15478993
>fence posts
4mm fence posts plus extras

[Anonymous No.15479000]

>>15478993
we were too dumb

[Anonymous No.15479005]

>>15479000
inb4 its a new engine skirt to help waft methane

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479012]

>>15479000
Your not as dumb as
>>15478952
thinks you are...

[Anonymous No.15479015]

>>15479012
couldn't you just attempt a decent on topic reply so i don't have to report you

[Anonymous No.15479024]

Is there a pressing need for major crew launches anyway? The best part is no part, and that includes crew. The colonization of Mars can be done completely robotically.

[Anonymous No.15479025]

>>15479024
a random guy with a shovel and a spectrometer could do what perseverance has been doing for 3 years in 20 minutes

[Anonymous No.15479029]

>>15478313
We can agree that if Starship doesn't deliver before cost of development exceeds both SLS costs and timelines for equivalent success, then they cannot be trusted to provide accurate numbers--as the only basis of fair comparison is that, and unwillingness to allow grace until such occurs is arguing in bad faith.

[Anonymous No.15479030]

>>15479024
>Is there a pressing need for major crew launches anyway?
GAMERS demand faster GPUs.
Are you gonna make 1000mm2 gpu dies on earth? Didn't think so.

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479032]

>>15479015
I would never report a post. You are free to do whatever you want. I don't know why you felt the need to respond to me...

[Anonymous No.15479034]

>>15478906
Until the engines like, its absurd how Kerbal Space Program-like it looks. That's some insanely good tracking and image stabilization during descent.

[Anonymous No.15479036]

>>15479032

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479037]

>>15479036
I'm better than you in every way.

[Anonymous No.15479038]

>>15479034
my brain didn't immediately comprehend the first landing back in 2016 or whenever it was, it was like a very well done cgi but it actually happened

[Anonymous No.15479040]

>>15479038
they should land them next to tall things too just for scale. fuck i love the f9 so much.

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479042]

>he is currently writing and deleting a response
>nothing makes sense to him or seems like a good response
>he doesn't know why
I win

[Anonymous No.15479045]

>>15479038
December 2015. Oh how time flies

[Anonymous No.15479047]

>In January 2016 Musk evaluated the likelihood of success to approximately 70 percent for landing attempts in 2016, hopefully rising to 90 percent in 2017; he also cautioned that the company expected "a few more RUDs", referring to the term Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly, a humorous euphemism for destruction of the vehicle.[92] Musk's prediction were close to the actual numbers, as five out of eight flown boosters (63%) were recovered in 2016, and 14 out of 14 (100%) in 2017. Three GTO missions for heavy payloads were flown in an expendable configuration, not equipped for landing. Five boosters were flown a second time in 2017, marking the beginning of routine reuse of boosters. In 2018 and 2019, more than half of the missions were flown with reused boosters, by 2021 over 90% of the flights reused boosters from previous flights.
rhetoric over results

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479049]

Thought so...

[Anonymous No.15479052]

How do I hide namefags again?
Asking for a friend.

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479054]

>>15479052
I saw some guy post an infographic I made a few weeks ago.

[Anonymous No.15479056]

>>15479052
With 4chan X installed, use the drop-down arrow on any given post and it'll give you the options at your disposal, including Filter

[Anonymous No.15479057]

>>15479052
4chanx - settings, hide stubs, post menu, filter, name
4chan phoneposting - report and will auto hide (you should do this anyway)

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479059]

>>15479056
Why are you responding to yourself, sir?

[Anonymous No.15479060]

>>15479052
4chanX, and to remove the stub use:
/^namefag$/i;stub:no;

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479062]

>>15479060
NO
DO NOT DO THIS
I'm warning you...!

[Anonymous No.15479065]

>>15479057
Yeah I’m phoneposting, crap I guess I will have to repost all the posts…

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479066]

>>15479062
This poster isnt me.

[Anonymous No.15479067]

>>15479065
you can hide each individual post but its the same shitting up the thread unless stubs are hidden. dunno why native 4chan cant support filtering etc.

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479070]

>>15479066
Of course not - I'm me. Who the hell are you?

[Anonymous No.15479073]

>>15478521
They use thad space for lots of things like batteries, might be hard to do that.
In any case that looks a bit weird and weak.

[Anonymous No.15479079]

:)

[Anonymous No.15479080]

:(

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15479081]

In my adult life, my favourite missions include; New Horizon, Both Mars Rover missions, James Webb, and all space x missions. I am very touched by space flight. Emotionally and spiritually. Spaceflight is the most important skill humans need to achieve. To bring us to a culmination. That's end result is spreading to other worlds. If we were in a ship I would do everything to win. To prove I'm right. If it takes you to "win" for me to win, even better. I will sit in the shadows and occasionally poke you. I will be banned. I will be mocked. I will be made fun of in good faith. But what they forget in all this mess...
I am spaceflight.

[Anonymous No.15479150]

>>15479060
thanks
much better

[Anonymous No.15479167]

>>15479034
digitally done.

[Anonymous No.15479168]

>>15478906
it's kinda like parking your car

[Anonymous No.15479169]

>>15478723
The earth is flat and stationary with a dome. They are never ever leaving this enclosed plane and neither are you sciencegoy.

https://youtu.be/eJK1gLHbOxA?t=1136
https://youtu.be/52dVfhgt_T4?t=694

[Anonymous No.15479171]

>>15478646
Imagine all the wonderful memetech that gets sent to space once starship is on a roll. So many dumb little cube sats sent from every random university

[Anonymous No.15479172]

>>15478677
It's so incredibly unattractive to hear grown men call something cute

[Anonymous No.15479173]

>>15479169
You know what the funniest thing about you calling him a goy is? Some of the most prolific OG proliferators of flat-earth with a dome over it were Jewish scholars.

[Anonymous No.15479176]

>>15479173
The absolute state of sciencegoys™

[Anonymous No.15479179]

[Anonymous No.15479189]

>>15478986
>and have ejection seats.
Because they're expected to eat a missile at some point, you retard.
Military cargo/awacs planes (which aren't expected to brave missiles) don't have ejection seats.
>And can glide to a safe place
Like orbit or Lisbon for a starship launch from KSC?
Also the ability of helicopters to autorotate, for example, is circumstantial at best.

[Anonymous No.15479193]

>>15478474
>>FOUR HUNDRED + AUD A MONTH FOR 50GB
My bet is this will come down in price dramatically once there's more laser interconnect starlinks. I wonder what those big cruise liners are paying and what sort of data caps they have, cause 50gb for $400 seems like absolute trash

[Anonymous No.15479199]

>>15478803
you can still use the mobility option but not in open sea
i've seen people post about using it in ports mostly, then have more costly data as an option if they really need to

[Anonymous No.15479201]

[Anonymous No.15479221]

still no flickr

[Anonymous No.15479227]

>>15479221
That's okay, the third party stuff is excellent

[Anonymous No.15479236]

>>15478806
why would you be tig welding when laser welding is far superior

[Anonymous No.15479239]

[Anonymous No.15479240]

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/13z3g3m/spacex_will_add_tmobile_direct_to_cellphone/

https://twitter.com/FREESPEECH1017/status/1663970072443097089
> As expected, Yesterday's SpaceX FCC filing shows that V2.0 Mini Satellites do indeed have D2D payload antennas. Page 30. Read it and weep!

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/10530137821424/1 (FCC filing pdf file)

[Anonymous No.15479241]

>>15479240
rest of the r*eddit post

[Anonymous No.15479242]

>>15479240
page 30 of the pdf

[Anonymous No.15479243]

>>15479189
didn't sputnik 4 have an ejection seat?

[Anonymous No.15479252]

>>15479240
what's D2D?

[Anonymous No.15479255]

Apollo Comms Part 28: Apollo AC power inverter and the great Apollo 13 debug https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUeFwyicV8o
includes Apollo 13 raw audio of the debug after the accident.

[Anonymous No.15479263]

>>15479252
device-to-device I guess in this context which would mean satellite-to-cellphone
not an network engineering so not sure

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Device-to-device

[Anonymous No.15479268]

>>15479263
but when i think about it, wouldn't device-to-device be between 2 cellphones? in starlinks case, the starlink satellite just functions as a orbiting base station
maybe the twitter poster is just wrong, or base stations only mean ground stations connected to some ground network

> Base stations in cellular telephone networks are more commonly referred to as cell towers. Each cellphone connects to the cell tower, which in turn connects it to the wired public switched telephone network (PSTN), the internet or to other cellphones within the cell.

https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/base-station

[Anonymous No.15479276]

If SpaceX is using resources to add the cellphone tower functionality to starlinks, then either Starship is behind on schedule (or the florida launch site is going to take too long to get online after starship works)
they are going to launch both V2 minis and V2s with Starship simultaneously for a while I guess, maybe this would have made sense even with a starship working sooner due to starlink demand

[Anonymous No.15479279]

Starship is likely behind their internal schedule. Starlink program is run well afaik

[Anonymous No.15479282]

https://chrisprophet.substack.com/p/next-starship-surge

> Now there are signs SpaceX are preparing for a second big surge at their Starbase facility. To date they have invested £3bn in Starship development, going back to 2014, but intend to invest another $2bn this year alone on the project. In addition, Elon Musk expects another 4 or 5 Starship launches this year, including reaching orbit. While Elon is famous for setting aggressive targets, his first lieutenant (who’s normally more moderate) appears equally bullish: -

> "Why can't we build a rocket every day? That's what we're focusing on with Starship, is attacking every part of the production process to be able to build lots of these machines." ~ Gwynne Shotwell/SpaceX COO

[Anonymous No.15479284]

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1664836100488142851

[Anonymous No.15479290]

>>15479284
this provokes antisemitic thoughts

[Anonymous No.15479309]

>>15479290
I don't know what you expect
Elon is a hypercapitalist who thinks American fixation on automobile based infrastructure is a great thing

[Anonymous No.15479311]

Cars are good. I hate public trans

[Anonymous No.15479315]

>>15479193
its like 1% of what the cost was before
if they didn't charge this, they would be leaving a lot of money on the table
It might take new satellite constellations to drive the price down as SpaceX isn't doing Starlink (purely) as some altruistic project to provide people with better/cheaper internet in places where there isn't fiber
I guess the price could come down too just from riding down the cost-demand curve or with more segmentation (something very expensive for cruise ships, cargo ships, oil tankers, oil platforms etc) and then something cheap for individuals with small yachts
but how many people with ships are there that can't afford these prices really?
they can afford a small ship, but can't afford the starlink price?

[Anonymous No.15479317]

>>15479221
still no IMAX

[Anonymous No.15479337]

https://spacenews.com/fixed-price-satellite-contracts-earn-high-grades-in-space-force-report-card/

[Anonymous No.15479342]

>>15479337
unfathomably based

[Anonymous No.15479352]

>>15479337
>Space Force advocates for fixed-price contracts
Boeingbros... I don't feel so good

[Anonymous No.15479389]

why is that flat earth schizo still not perma banned of off /sci/?

[Anonymous No.15479391]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP7c0KQHQsc

[Anonymous No.15479392]

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

[Anonymous No.15479403]

>>15479389
Flat Earthers should be welcome here.

[Anonymous No.15479413]

>>15479392
good short summary of chinese private rocket company history in the first 5 minutes

[Anonymous No.15479427]

>>15479392
5 different private companies about to develop a falcon 9 clone, 3 of them are planning to launch sometime in 2024 (and a bunch of powerpoint rockets from other companies, that would come online much later)
state owned companies have tested spaceplanes in the 80s and looking at some spaceplanes right now but not much info about them
current reusable rockets from state owned companies are: Long march 10 lunar rocket, launch scheduled for 2027 (falcon heavy clone basically), some university is developing a complete new line of rockets ( some of which will be reusable), long march 9 is being developed (a starship clone, partially reusable at first, slated to be launched in 2030s, a fully reusable version in the 2040s)

[Anonymous No.15479429]

Because of the way that SpaceX have set up their project, it's very hard to imagine how any company would compete on a purely economic basis.
Their success basically depends on achieving a high flight rate, but if they do actually pull that off, they will blow basically any lower flight rate strategies out of the water.

If for example spaceX had to compete with an already established low flight rate re-usable strategy (IE Blorigin, a spaceplane design ect) they would find it probably much harder as it would suck up all of the market share at a lower cost, however because there is no real re-usable alternative, they can cushion their considerable capital costs/amortization and actually get the opportunity to expand the market by lowering costs.

IMO this is a big part of why only China can truly compete with SpaceX in the long term, since their need for strategic independence can subsidise the project.
Whereas even the most viable competition to spaceX, blue origin, can only succeed if Starship fails.

[Anonymous No.15479436]

>>15479429
China is basically an independent market, so SpaceX strategy (taking what you say at face value, not sure I completely agree with you but anyway) there as well
other countries could try to replicate this partly by having fixed price contracts for a shitload of launches for something like a starlink clone and but competing against eachother
something like european space companies competing to build multiple different reusable medium lift vehicles, this subsidized by EU or something buying that large LEO satellite network, perhaps building their own space station too (with fixed price contracts) but doing that by banning non-european entities from competing
so these companies would compete, price would come down within the european market insulated from the world market and after 10 years or something, the costs could start to approach falcon 9 costs
of course what spacex is doing is a moving target, but the next step would be to continue that private market and make the private companies copy starship

[Anonymous No.15479438]

>>15479436
to add to this, the european launch companies could also of course provide their services on the world market and perhaps get business from entities like amazon that refuse to use SpaceX to launch kuiper
I think the bigger problem is the existence of arianespace and the stranglehold it has (like ULA had previously)
there is also the question of european bureucracy
a lot of things would have to happen for the EU to get independent, cost-parity launch to SpaceX
maybe if EU sees a independent starlink clone as important enough

[Anonymous No.15479454]

>>15477964
to dramatically increase the user base while they have the dominant market share retard

[Anonymous No.15479455]

>>15479403
as ash

[Anonymous No.15479459]

>>15478450
>AI
Where. show a single speck of consciousness. All there is are marketing buzzwords and advanced algorithms fueling fancy chatbots and art generators

[Anonymous No.15479460]

>>15479459
you will be an AI slave before you know it

[Anonymous No.15479463]

[Anonymous No.15479469]

>>15479024
>The colonization of Mars can be done completely robotically.
yeah. sure. just like all of those bots sent there that are having a heart attack if they get stuck in some random pothole or small sand dune. or fail not because the hardware gives up but because the solar panels get covered with dust and they dont have someone with a simple cloth to wipe them clean.

having a cheap to make, universal general utility intelligence there (like a human monkey) is always better then having the bots slowly fail while waiting for new ones to be built and sent.

[Anonymous No.15479480]

>>15477964
if there is elasticity of demand, then lowering prices might result in more revenue in total even with no competition

[Anonymous No.15479488]

>spaceX wasted 5 billion on starship and they have nothing to show for it.
>meanwhile starliner has already made it to space
BOEING SUPREMACY!!!!

[Anonymous No.15479501]

>>15479413
The names themselves are all ripoffs of existing space companies. What an impressive achievement

[Anonymous No.15479503]

>>15479501
But they have some really good CGI of shit they will never build.

[Anonymous No.15479506]

>>15479413
I just realised. Are rocket and engine names trademarked? What's stopping Chang from building a "Falcon" rocket powered by "Merlin" engines? What's stopping *me*?

[Anonymous No.15479510]

>>15479506
WTO has trademark agreements. I assume that if a competitor named their stuff after SpaceX they would raise a ruckus.

[Anonymous No.15479514]

What are your thoughts on the 8-part series "Debunking Starship" by Common Sense Skeptic?

[Anonymous No.15479516]

>>15479514
haven't seen it but he's wrong

[Anonymous No.15479524]

>>15479514
>the best minds in aerospace engineering
>a youtube deboonker
choose wisely rocket man

[Anonymous No.15479526]

>>15479514
It's been a while since I've seen parts of it, but iirc he kept getting hung up on random details that SpaceX hasn't worked on yet and aren't important at this stage of Starship's development like radiation shielding.

[Anonymous No.15479533]

>>15479526
radiation shielding is a total nothingburger

[Anonymous No.15479538]

>>15479514
>>15479526

TLDR
>Starship is developed to hopefully be the USSF's main launcher
>It is developed for the US military, not NASA
>It doesn't have an emergency escape system
>It is very costly to launch, $2m per launch is nonsense
>Mars is nonsense, it's developed for the military
>it has no radiation shielding
>Max crew capacity is more like 17 rather than 100

Those are his arguments pretty much

[Anonymous No.15479546]

>>15479538
>it's developed for USMil, not NASA
is he retarded it's developed for commercial (Starlink) interests

[Anonymous No.15479548]

>>15479538
>max crew capacity is ONLY 17
did he really make this argument? that's literally sending up the current record number of people in orbit at once, on a reusable vehicle. A revolution in crew capability

[Anonymous No.15479549]

>>15479538
>$2m per launch is nonsense
it is nonsense desu. would be surprised if they manage to reach 30 million per launch this decade

[Anonymous No.15479552]

>>15479538
i can imagine 17 as a realistic number for a 6 month mars trip, but 100 to leo is totally doable. 100 overweight humans only weight 10,000kg.

[Anonymous No.15479553]

>he thinks this is about the weight of the humans

[Anonymous No.15479554]

>>15479552
Why do americans always use fat bitches as a unit of measurement?

[Anonymous No.15479555]

>>15479553
what is his/your argument then?

[Anonymous No.15479556]

>>15479548
He went on a whole video rant about How 100 people isn't possible in the first proposed mockups of what Starship would do/what it looked like at the time, and while he is correct that it was probably too small to house 100 people a lot of the video was him going on a rant about stuff taking way more space than they would when you just integrate things.
Like starship must have a medbay!
And they must have an entertainment area!
And this and that thing, which yeah fair enough. But they can actually put more than one type of room into a single scientist room, which he didn't really consider. But thats just CSS in a nutshell, he never considers anything, it's just - this can't be done because it's literary impossible in its proposed form

[Anonymous No.15479563]

>>15479538
>It is very costly to launch, $2m per launch is nonsense
Has anyone actually ran the numbers to see if $2m per launch is possible?

[Anonymous No.15479565]

>>15479538
>someone actually watched it
LMAO

[Anonymous No.15479568]

>>15479563
It’s not possible, just look up the cost of liquid oxygen and liquid methane and multiply it by SS’s tank volumes

[Anonymous No.15479569]

>>15479563
$2m per launch is just the nominal fuel prices for SpaceX. Thats assuming fully reusable, without any other launch fees and employees being paid on nominal basis for general company stuff.

Musk has said that actualized (all costs considered) cost will likely be ~10M if I recall right during Q/A session @ Starbase

[Anonymous No.15479570]

what qualifications does he have to make these common sense sceptical proclamations on all matters?

[Anonymous No.15479573]

>>15479570
Being a schizophrenic with internet access makes you qualified in 2023

[Anonymous No.15479574]

>>15479568
Methane and Oxygen can be extracted from NEOs and sent to a LEO parking orbit

[Anonymous No.15479576]

>>15479570
Does he have an English accent? I've never watched him but I assume he's English.
Being English gains you automatic credibility points on the internet.

[Anonymous No.15479579]

>>15479438
>a lot of things would have to happen for the EU to get independent, cost-parity launch to SpaceX
Understatement of the year. I'm pretty sure the only way for european spaceflight in general is some kind of continent-wide societal collapse.

[Anonymous No.15479582]

>>15479317
imax owns the rights to all official spacex starship fotos abd video. you will have to pay for imax+ to see

[Anonymous No.15479587]

>>15479429
Why did tropics go up on rocket 3(lol) and electron when it could have been rideshared on falcon 9? I don’t know the answer to this but I do know that if rocketlab got reusability working and dropped their prices in half, it would have been more compelling yet still more expensive than rideshare.
that’s just how it is in rockets. You don’t have to be as competitive as you do in other fields.

[Anonymous No.15479589]

>>15479552
100 to the moon
1000 to LEO
I'd put it at between 50 and 80 for Mars

[Anonymous No.15479590]

>>15479587
the us govt throwing all launches at sx on cost alone could be seen as anti competitive and there is a slim chance these other launchers might come up with something new.

[Anonymous No.15479598]

>all the paid glowie shills itt go home on weekends
Comfy desu

[Anonymous No.15479605]

> ESA is useless and gay
o rly?
>The food we eat determines how we feel, and nothing beats a good fry-up, although in moderation of course. As we prepare for missions to the Moon and on to Mars, astronauts will be happy to hear from researchers that one staple comfort food is not out of reach, even in space: fries.
https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Human_and_Robotic_Exploration/Research/Flying_frying_in_microgravity

[Anonymous No.15479606]

>>15479605
>se. As we prepare for missions to the Moon and on to Mars
cringe. the esa can't even get its gay rover out of this well.

[Anonymous No.15479625]

https://archiveofourown.org/tags/Apollo%2013%20(1995)/works
wtf

[Anonymous No.15479628]

Been off /sfg/ almost entirely since OFT-1, any word on next flight yet? Last I saw work was being done to fix the OLM and prevent more concrete shotgunning. I did hear that BO finally sued their way into getting their lander funded too.

[Anonymous No.15479632]

>>15479625
good lord

[Anonymous No.15479635]

>>15479628
Late summer / early fall.

[Anonymous No.15479645]

>>15478880
t. never heard of Earthers

[Anonymous No.15479653]

>>15479628
2 months

[Anonymous No.15479657]

>>15479503
some of these companies have actually launched rockets

[Anonymous No.15479660]

>>15479635
>>15479653
Looking forward to it bros, I hope the next one doesn't try to fucking throw Starship free of the booster. It looked funny but it's too nuts, even though it impressively didn't disintegrate while flipping around.

[Anonymous No.15479671]

>>15479514
I think a lot of it was based on some ancient cgi drawings that artists probably made
and then he bases the criticism on that or something similarly retarded
he might be correct at times, but due to being extremely biased against Musk (and by extension SpaceX) and anything Musk does that is kind of useless as its impossible to distinguish from all the retarded shit
the way it works is, assume Musk/SpaceX is wrong, then find supporting evidence for it
make it up if you have to, always assume the worst possible circumstances, ignore new information that might prove you wrong
generally extremely disingenuous

[Anonymous No.15479686]

>>15479582
>he thinks I'm gonna pay for it

[Anonymous No.15479693]

Does anyone know when Chinas ILRS program will be announced? It’s going to be their version of the Artemis accords and I read it was supposed to be signed this year by a bunch of countries

[Anonymous No.15479699]

>>15479693
what do you mean? hasn't it already been announced? or are you talking about some more specific plans

[Anonymous No.15479702]

>>15479699
It’s been announced but I’m talking about when countries will officially sign it, like when countries sign the Artemis Accords

[Anonymous No.15479703]

>>15479702
maybe in a few years when china is actually GAAN

[Anonymous No.15479704]

>>15479693
nobody believes China can do it

[Anonymous No.15479708]

>>15479704
ILRS is easily doable by china since its all robotic. the only hard part will be getting the landers in the same area. china might need to make their own lunar gps for it.

[Anonymous No.15479715]

>>15479693
>>15479699

https://www.unoosa.org/documents/pdf/copuos/2021/AM_3._China_ILRS_Guide_for_Partnership_V1.0Presented_by_Ms.Hui_JIANG.pdf

[Anonymous No.15479720]

Russia plans to make a reusable super heavy launch vehicle

https://www.easternherald.com/2023/04/26/roscosmos-chief-borisov-says-russias-new-super-heavy-rocket-will-be-reusable/

[Anonymous No.15479733]

old articles about the china moon base

https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/science/china-wants-start-using-moon-soil-build-lunar-bases-soon-this-decade-2023-04-12/

[Anonymous No.15479736]

>>15479733
> China Could Set Up ‘Moon Base’ By 2028; Lunar Station Likely To Be Powered By Nuclear Energy – Chief Designer
> China’s chief of the lunar program has announced that the country’s lunar base, which is to be established on the Moon’s south pole, will be powered by nuclear energy.

https://eurasiantimes.com/china-could-set-up-moon-base-by-2028-lunar-station/

[Anonymous No.15479739]

https://www.space.com/china-land-astronaut-on-the-moon-2030

> China is already working on the necessary hardware for landing astronauts on the moon. The country is developing a next-generation rocket to launch an upgraded crew spacecraft, while work is underway on a lunar lander.

[Anonymous No.15479744]

https://spacenews.com/china-to-establish-organization-to-coordinate-international-moon-base/

> Wu Weiren, Director General of the Deep Space Exploration Laboratory (DSEL), said during an exploration conference April 25 that the International Lunar Research Station Cooperation Organization (ILRSCO) would soon be established to coordinate and manage the construction of the ILRS moon base. Founding members are expected to sign the agreement on ILRSCO before June.

before June? its June now

> CNSA and the Asia-Pacific Space Cooperation Organization (APSCO) signed a joint statement on ILRS cooperation as part of the opening ceremony of DSEL’s first International Conference on Deep Space Exploration in Hefei, Anhui province on April 25. APSCO members include China, Bangladesh, Iran, Mongolia, Pakistan, Peru and Thailand.

> Wu noted that CNSA has signed cooperation agreements or letters of intent with a number of countries and international bodies, including Russia, Argentina, Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates, Brazil since unveiling the first ILRS road map 2021, South China Morning Post reported.

> State media Global Times reported that more than 10 countries are currently negotiating the agreement. Venezuela is understood to be close to signing an agreement on the ILRS.

> The ILRS project and ILRSCO are somewhat analogous to the U.S.-led Artemis program and its political underpinning, the Artemis Accords, to which 23 countries have signed up. Notably Russia had been stated to be a joint partner in the ILRS when unveiled in 2021. However, overt mentions of Russia have been missing from Chinese statements of the plan following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

[Anonymous No.15479748]

>>15479744
https://twitter.com/CNSpaceflight/status/1650687403642986496

some sources say by june, some say in june, but I guess some official signing should come up soon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Lunar_Exploration_Program

[Anonymous No.15479756]

https://twitter.com/Ringwatchers/status/1665017156558258176

[Anonymous No.15479757]

These are the two most important space startups now.

This year we will see
>Asteroid mining and exploration tech demonstrations
>orbital manufacturing

This is the real cool stuff, not rocket launch startup #383619461

>

[Anonymous No.15479760]

>>15479756
old vs new dome shape, newer has less welds so quicker to build

[Anonymous No.15479771]

>>15479720
BASED.
TOTAL EVERYONE ELSE SHAME

[Anonymous No.15479773]

>>15479172
post tits or gtfo

[Anonymous No.15479777]

>>15479720
>NASA&ESA&ROSCOSMOS before spaceX
>space is hard, give us more taxpayer money, bitch!!!
>>NASA&ESA&ROSCOSMOS after spaceX
>actually, we could build reusable heavy rockets!!!!
>please dont cut our budget and outsource our rockets!!

[Anonymous No.15479780]

>>15479255
imagine being this scared of a little asbestos.
just take it apart outside and blow compressed air on it

[Anonymous No.15479785]

I haven't been able to post for a while, but the reason the previous-previous thread >>15470691 went missing is that some noob jannie nuked it while it was still on page 10 waiting to be archived. Probably thought it was a duplicate thread or something lame like that.

[Anonymous No.15479789]

>>15479785
Not because of astronaut gore?

[Anonymous No.15479790]

>>15479757
I agree with the sentiment though I don't know about the specific startups. Space access seems to me too mature for startups to find a good foothold as the big movers are all pushing their own tech forward rapidly.

[Anonymous No.15479791]

>>15479570
Haven't you watched him? He always refers to his own thoughts and opinions with: "we think", or "we looked into"
So it's quite clear he has that mythic split personality we always hear so much about

[Anonymous No.15479792]

>>15479720
fake as hell, a propaganda piece
>>15479733
>>15479736
deceptive, a bunch of rovers in one place is called "pointless" not a moon base
>>15479739
not going to happen before 2030
probably mid 2030s, I'll believe it when I see the launch vehicle
>>15479744
about as real as BRICS

[Anonymous No.15479796]

>>15479785
>>15479789
does anybody have the rocket gijinkas that were posted saved? I did not save a copy of them

[Anonymous No.15479799]

>>15479789
I mean it was a shitty thread from all the schizos, but I always leave the old threads open until they die, and it got the "pruned" message, I was like wtf. It had to be a jannie wasn't paying attention when killing off a bunch of the trash threads that /sci/ gets.

[Anonymous No.15479802]

>>15479757
>asteroid mining
We've already deboonked this many times, it is not a viable business startegy

[Anonymous No.15479804]

>>15479799
wait... I think there's a setting where mods can mark a thread "kill this when it falls off page 10", so maybe a mod could have set that during the worst of the trash, but it would still have to be a noob to not know about /sfg/
Getting rid of board-specific mods/jannies was a mistake.

[Anonymous No.15479811]

>>15479804
There has been so many issues with the jannies not doing their jobs properly as of late, of the generals I was visiting on another board has been in a shit state for months, even now Jannies are doing completely dumb shit that they have no business meddeling with

[Anonymous No.15479812]

>>15479802
>find gold
>mine gold
Not too hard

[Anonymous No.15479814]

>>15479802
It is for building things on-orbit, such as spinhabs.

[Anonymous No.15479817]

>>15479757
Im just not so sure how Varda can be profitable when the payload is so small, can that little tube really manufacture millions worth of pharmaceuticals to justify purchasing a launch for it?

[Anonymous No.15479818]

>>15479817
Size for reference

[Anonymous No.15479820]

>>15479814
Using it for building is acceptable, but selling the resources you find is not. You will flood the markets with how much there is out there, devaluing your product and giving you razor thin margins. You also cant just hold your stock to make it expensive like diamonds because there is still a good amount of whatever material on Earth sold by other mines, so its never worth all the effort. In addition to using never before seen 0G extraction/mining methods, you have to pay for rocket launches and even on a Starship its going to be expensive as all hell when the general mining industry requires transportation of massive payloads even on Earth. Needless to say, if you want to use it to build things in orbit on another planet, then yes it's cheaper and probably worth it due to massive launch costs. Any other reason it is most certainly not.

[Anonymous No.15479824]

>>15479820
Lets not even mention regulations

[Anonymous No.15479825]

Is there even capacity for starship to be launching dozens of times a year from the cape, they are already bursting at the seams as it is.

We need a new launch site, where could one be out, Puerto Rico?

[Anonymous No.15479833]

>>15479825
Kenya (easily bribe the government), Puerto Rico, any central american country (bribe/excited for economic development), China (good relations), India (smart people there and already friendly to spaceflight via ISRO), UAE (UAE just flew on a Dragon, they would be very interested in hosting a port).

[Anonymous No.15479842]

>>15479833
Starship launch from China? My man has been smoking on some good kush. What is ITAR even.

[Anonymous No.15479853]

>>15479833
I think UAE is the most viable out of all of this

[Anonymous No.15479855]

>>15479833
Would having a Falcon site in the UAE violate ITAR?

[Anonymous No.15479860]

[Anonymous No.15479861]

>>>/k/

[Anonymous No.15479862]

>>15479825
SpaceX launching close to 100 times this year total. They can launch 25X atleast, if they change from Falcon 9 to Starship just for Starlinks alone. Thats not accounting for delays in Falcon 9 shipping/handling/refurbishment process

[Anonymous No.15479867]

>>15479833
>Kenya
Not as politically stable as anyone in the west would like. ESA thought about building there before settling for French Guiana

>Puerto Rico
No infrastructure, it's on an island so it's hell to ship anything in, and the government is so corrupt it makes Chicago look like its run by saints. NASA thought about launching Apollo from there back in the day and it was a bad idea then too.

>any central american country
Similar issues to PR, bad infrastructure and shifty governemnt, but at least they're not on an island.

>China
We do not have good relations with China, and even if we did they wouldn't want anything in their territory that makes their rockets look small and/or flaccid. Maybe Taiwan though.

>UAE
>>15479855 None of the states in Arabia are signatories to the Missile Technology Control Regime so it's not hard to see someone in the State Department complaining about it. It's not impossible, but there'd need to be some diplomatic groundwork done first.

>India
This one might actually work

[Anonymous No.15479868]

>>15479825
Just give the whole cape to SpaceX

[Anonymous No.15479875]

>>15479862
This, Cape doesn't care about cumulative environmental impact just about number of launches.
They can go a long way just replacing Starlink flights with Starship.

[Anonymous No.15479876]

>>15479802
It's worthwhile for propellant extraction for depots.

[Anonymous No.15479877]

>>15479757
God, AstroForge has one of the most obnoxious websites I've seen. And I've never heard serious talk of them so there's no way they can tackle asteroid mining. Dr. Won Suk You is an Asiana Airlines tier name though.
Varda has a sketchy business plan too, but people seem to like them and are flying soon, so I'll bite my tongue for now.

[Anonymous No.15479918]

>ship 30, 31, and 32's nose cones have been pumped out in the last 24 hours
oh shit

[Anonymous No.15479922]

>>15479876
Yes, anything to do with off-Earth orbital structures it is worth using, but shipping it back to Earth just to be sold like a mine would (AstroForge wants to do this) is completely worthless, and any company with this business plan will fail as I explained >>15479820 here.>>15479820

[Anonymous No.15479925]

>>15478946
Didn't read, just put starship onto orbit unmanned, then launch dragon with crew.
Simple as that

[Anonymous No.15479931]

>>15479817
>>15479818
Isn't it a proof-of-concept pathfinder? It doesn't have to manufacture million's of dollars worth of stuff, just prove that it's possible to make something in space and see what problems are encountered

[Anonymous No.15479963]

>>15479720
Tell us when they cut steel. Anyone can announce things.

[Anonymous No.15479969]

>>15479538
I'm not even gonna bother trying to work out the mental gymnastics that go into this kind of thing.

[Anonymous No.15479970]

>>15479720
That's nice. Plans from Russia don't mean anything, though. Roscosmos is all talk and no substance, and any allocation of funding for new stuff always ends up being embezzled.

[Anonymous No.15479985]

>>15479867
That diplomatic groundwork is a treaty to guarantee no forced tech transfer. Trump got one with Brazil (for Alcantara), Biden got one with Australia.

[Anonymous No.15479994]

>>15479720

[Anonymous No.15480007]

>>15479760
and looks structurally more sound

[Anonymous No.15480022]

[Anonymous No.15480030]

>>15480022
why is it burning under the skirt?

[Anonymous No.15480032]

SpaceXbros... we won!

[Anonymous No.15480037]

>>15480030
It just does ok?!

[Anonymous No.15480038]

>>15480030
Flow recirculation

[Anonymous No.15480041]

>>15480037
The film cameras give so much more detail it's silly.

[Anonymous No.15480047]

[Anonymous No.15480053]

>>15480041
Meanwhile spacexstans coping with Everyday Astronaut's footage

[Anonymous No.15480054]

orange rocket... well filmed

[Anonymous No.15480056]

>>15480047
lol they forgot to turn on the 4 engines

[Anonymous No.15480059]

>>15480056
now you see the true power of hydrolox - americas rocket fuel

[Anonymous No.15480061]

[Anonymous No.15480064]

Reminder

[Anonymous No.15480073]

>>15480056
The first mach diamonds in the exhaust plume are visible

[Anonymous No.15480088]

>>15479514
Some of it is kind of entertaining especially his newer videos when the editing improved. Most of his points are very shallow and full of extremely harsh assumptions, he doesn't really give proper reasoning behind his assumptions for the most part. What I like the most though is that the videos essentially prove that Starship can work, every single one of his points boils down to, "it's difficult", like his one on 'debunking' refueling on Mars, where his points are that it's possible but it'll be difficult to do it quickly and they will need lots of equipment. Recently he did a music video about Teslas setting on fire and has a random stat in it which is just a complete lie and easily debunked in 30 seconds with a google search, he seems to be getting way more schizo

[Anonymous No.15480091]

>>15480073
thanks autist

[Anonymous No.15480093]

>>15480064
I still wonder if zuma is out there

[Anonymous No.15480108]

[Anonymous No.15480116]

>>15480108
sweaty

[Anonymous No.15480120]

why is it so hard to master RTLS?

[Anonymous No.15480127]

>>15480120
you need an entire system dedicated to it. F9 stages early and has a fat S2. those things are critical for RTLS.

[Anonymous No.15480128]

>>15480064
>hey what's that buttplug in space doing?
>i don't but it spooks me maybe if we ignore it it wouldn't try to anally rape us
>smart move

[Anonymous No.15480172]

>>15479720
The most honest Russian press release

[Anonymous No.15480177]

>>15478440
>SpaceX is lying more than NASA and perhaps more than any aerospace company
>any aerospace company
Have you not heard of Blue Origin?

[Anonymous No.15480178]

>>15480177
Blue Origin doesn't lie because they never say or do anything

[Anonymous No.15480190]

So what the hell is Jarvis supposed to be? I get it’s a reusable second stage but wouldn’t it be too heavy to have any meaningful payload size?

[Anonymous No.15480199]

>>15480190
shitty payload and reusable is better than great payload and not reusable

[Anonymous No.15480201]

are there any Russian vatnig telegram channels focused on spaceflight stuff? Preferably in English with comments on

[Anonymous No.15480202]

>>15480201
there's the Russian image board about space

[Anonymous No.15480203]

>>15480202
Yea I know about dvach. Too bad half the board are /SpaceX General/ threads because they don’t know about the concept of staging on page 10

[Anonymous No.15480209]

>>15480203
lol a true /sfg/ innovation

[Anonymous No.15480216]

>>15480091
if 2 turbines are better than one, why not 3 or 4 turbines

[Anonymous No.15480219]

CRS 28 tomorrow https://blogs.nasa.gov/crs-28/2023/06/03/launch-now-slated-for-sunday/

[Anonymous No.15480225]

[LIVE] Shenzhou 15 Returning to Earth [English & Chinese] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xEeijS0PWY
Clear Live in 15 minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TODu5wbKl-Q

[Anonymous No.15480228]

>>15480225
180 days ish, not bad

[Anonymous No.15480236]

>>15480209
let's be honest /sfg/ is the most organized general on any chan

>>15480216
You can get full flow staged combustion with as little as 2 turbines.

[Anonymous No.15480239]

>>15480236
don't you shittalk my nigga /handgun general/ like that

[Anonymous No.15480243]

>>15480201
RT has a comments section
>https://www.rt.com/news/575076-spacex-starship-test-explosion/

[Anonymous No.15480245]

>>15480225
reentry burn started, I think

[Anonymous No.15480250]

>>15480225
why does that man have two microphones
can china not into AV

[Anonymous No.15480253]

>>15480250
Clear LIVE

[Anonymous No.15480256]

>>15480253
i wonder how much he weighs

[Anonymous No.15480258]

>>15480243
I may have just dreamed it, but I swear that ages ago we had some roscosmos shill stumble in here and sperg out (esl style) about the new nuclear rockets that russia was going to build.
He sure had a large powerpoint collection.

[Anonymous No.15480259]

>>15480236
/sfg/ has a solid mid 400s isp

[Anonymous No.15480264]

>>15480216
because two is better than three or four

[Anonymous No.15480266]

>>15480239
those gay niggers can blow my ass, it's not organized when one tripfag is the entire thread

[Anonymous No.15480270]

Commander China Fei Junlong, PLAAC
Second spaceflight
Operator Deng Qingming, PLAAC
First spaceflight
System Operator China Zhang Lu, PLAAC
First spaceflight

[Anonymous No.15480278]

>>15480270
Capt. Ho Le Fuk and Lt. Wi Tu Low

[Anonymous No.15480279]

Roscosmos will never be great again, will they?

[Anonymous No.15480283]

>>15480258
it has been a very painfull year for the russians.
Take /k/ for example, every since the start of that board there where endless threads made by russian anons and pro soviet anons from all over the world talking about how the soviet/russians could take on all of nato and wipe them out in days, and how all soviet/russian tech was 10 times better then whatever nato had.
And these threads always devolved in to anons telling them they where delusional and russian anons screaming back that they where the delusional ones.
/sfg/ was special because the whole spaceX&falcon9 running circles around ROSCOSMOS (and ESA and NASA) was a prelude at how the rest of 4chan would start talking about russian tech.
Except /pol/, those fuckers are way too far gone.

[Anonymous No.15480285]

>>15480279
The braindrain is probably in full swing over there, with the FSB breathing down their necks to keep them from running.

[Anonymous No.15480286]

it's impressive that Russia can still maintain their Soyuz and manned spaceflight capabilities regardless. The Russian ISS segment hasn't blown up yet. How much nannying does NASA do though?

[Anonymous No.15480292]

>>15480286
Probably says more about how much of soyuz parts are build in russia.

[Anonymous No.15480295]

>He's waiting for an unsuspecting e*rther to open the door...

[Anonymous No.15480296]

>>15480279
>china, south africa, and belarus
exciting

[Anonymous No.15480303]

>>15480296
i still find it amazing how russia still wants to work together with china after the giant "fuck you" the chinese have them when putting up their own new space station.

[Anonymous No.15480305]

It's crazy how we're still referring to countries when discussing spaceflight. "Russia" "China" "India". It just goes to show how private industry is still superseded by government direction in those places. idk.

[Anonymous No.15480308]

>>15480285
>The braindrain is probably in full swing over there
Lockheed and friends started papercliping Russian aerospace engineers HARD after the wall came down, but the real problem has been that space pays the worst out of all the sectors of Russian aerospace. Russia has been producing new talent but it consistently chooses to find employment in other industries.

[Anonymous No.15480312]

>>15480303
Slavic pride does not allow potential Russian partners to refuse.

[Anonymous No.15480314]

[Anonymous No.15480315]

>>15480305
The US goverment can end spaceX overnight and absorb everything it has, just look at the bureaucracy they have to work against.
ROSCOSMOS is being used as a political tool in the current conflict;
Every company in mainland china lives and dies by the whims of the CCP, and most of them are just embezzlement schemes by CCP party members.
India i dont really know how far the goverment is involved.

On the other hand, a dystopian cyberpunk world where companies can go to space without any goverment oversight is a scary thing too.

[Anonymous No.15480317]

>>15480266
your expletive's wrong,
malaphorical: he blows
it out his ass, sped

[Anonymous No.15480318]

>>15480315
>On the other hand, a dystopian cyberpunk world where companies can go to space without any goverment oversight is a scary thing too.
That would be the best possible outcome

[Anonymous No.15480319]

>>15480314

[Anonymous No.15480321]

>>15480318
Then you will just end up with the helghast.

[Anonymous No.15480323]

>>15480319

[Anonymous No.15480325]

>>15480323

[Anonymous No.15480328]

>>15480314
It descends on just one chute?

[Anonymous No.15480330]

>>15480315
The US government can end SpaceX, but it can't do so without ruining what makes SpaceX great in the first place. For comparison, see Boeing. See also China's desperate attempts to foster their own "private" spaceflight industry.

[Anonymous No.15480332]

>>15480325

[Anonymous No.15480334]

>>15480332
flag up

[Anonymous No.15480335]

>>15480332
>it fell over
OH NO NO NO

[Anonymous No.15480336]

welcome back taikonauts

[Anonymous No.15480337]

>>15480334

[Anonymous No.15480340]

>>15480337

[Anonymous No.15480343]

>>15480340

[Anonymous No.15480344]

>>15480343

[Anonymous No.15480347]

>>15480344

[Anonymous No.15480348]

fun fact, 30 shenzhous can fit in a starship

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15480349]

Test

[Anonymous No.15480350]

>>15480348
And that's terrible.

[Anonymous No.15480354]

>15480349
i have been seeing these "test" post on other boards too??

[Anonymous No.15480364]

>>15480347

[Anonymous No.15480368]

>>15480364

[Anonymous No.15480370]

>>15480317

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15480371]

>>15480354
It is to see if I'm banned. On this particular board there are alot of nerds, who don't realize being smart (like I am) means you don't have to be a socially crippled person. It's not my fault they don't understand my sense of humor. Considering I started the first /sfg/ I find it only to be funny, when I am not greeted appropriately. I will probably be banned for this post.

[Anonymous No.15480373]

instead of typing "test" have you considered putting some effort into it and posting something worth reading?

[Anonymous No.15480374]

>>15480371
>>>/r9k/

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15480376]

>>15480373
No, I don't think I will...
>>15480374
Nice post. Thank you for contributing to my thread. Not sure what you are implying.

[Anonymous No.15480380]

>>15480368

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15480385]

>>15480376
He probably posted in the wrong tab. Don't take it personally. If he actually meant to post here, just take the high road and ignore him.

[Anonymous No.15480397]

is moonfall good

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15480403]

>>15480397
Not sure. But the full moon occurs tomorrow.

[Anonymous No.15480405]

>>15480397
>is a hollywood movie good
no

[Anonymous No.15480406]

>>15480321
>using science fiction stories as a proxy for realistic thinking
No, you would not get the Helghast because they are not a real thing that has happened or could happen.

[Anonymous No.15480408]

>>15480397
It's soft disclosure.

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15480419]

I was bothered while watching Ad Astra a few years ago in the theatre. The scene where they are in the moon base, the gravity is earth like. When they were outside the base it was moon type gravity. There was no mention of magnetic floors that simulate gravity. Was it a purposeful decision? Or did they not realize it made no sense...

[Anonymous No.15480424]

>>15480419
Too difficult to CGI an indoors scene. Also regarded as distracting, the audience will forgive you not doing it. You can do it outdoors where everyone is suited up, it's mostly CGI anyway.

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15480432]

>>15480424
I get that. But I think it is noticably primitive to use theatrical notions (such as I know that they know I'm watching a play) like that. I would have liked if they at least gave a reason. To be fair it would be trying too hard to explicitly explain a variable magnetic shoe system.

[Anonymous No.15480446]

>>15480406
The British East India Company would be a real-world parallel. Also, the Helghast did nothing wrong.

[Anonymous No.15480460]

>>15480424
don't reply

>>15480354
don't reply

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15480470]

>>15480460
You guttless worm. Be in the same room as me and you will act properly. You would not dare cross my threshold. I'm better at spaceflight than you. Don't ever insult me again. You thru-gut mongoloid. I could love you like a brother if you let me. I'm a nice guy...

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15480472]

Thought so...

[Anonymous No.15480484]

A part of me feels it'd be better if starships had a dragon on top for the first few manned trips. Set up just like a F9 then once they get to space, dragon detaches, re-attaches to a docking part. Then people explore inside.

[Anonymous No.15480490]

>>15480484
why? just launch dragon on f9 then transfer crew to starship

[Anonymous No.15480491]

>>15480490
Don't know if the F9 will be around by that time. Plus the nice part is even if F9 is around. by having what is effectively an escape pod. Any failures are far better off if the vehicle itself suffers.

[Anonymous No.15480493]

>>15480397
Is it entertaining? Yes. Is it good? Not even close. Watch it with a friend and have a laugh.

[Anonymous No.15480496]

>>15479605
>>15479606
Say one nice thing about Europeans. I'll start. We'll never have to worry about running into one on Mars.

[Anonymous No.15480501]

why not just make a robot that can build other robets and program it to build a mars base?

[Anonymous No.15480503]

>>15480501
popsci brain mush.jpg

[Anonymous No.15480505]

>>15480501
we were too dumb...

[Anonymous No.15480507]

>>15480503
>von neumann
>dyson
>popsci
who do you consider "real" scientists?

[Anonymous No.15480509]

>>15480507
>von neumann
>dyson
The worst kind of idea men

[Anonymous No.15480539]

>>15480501
>a robot that can build other robets
A simple iPhone contains silicon, lithium, cobalt, gallium, platinum, palladium, neodymium, boron, tantalum, cobalt and a host of other rare materials which are sourced from multiple different continents. Good luck finding all of them in one place (or you can start developing the massive logistics network needed for such a project). And even if you simplify/localize the design, a massive amount of industrial infrastructure is needed to build any robot. You're talking about something that's at minimum the size of a small factory, and at that point you might as well just call it a fully automated base.

[Anonymous No.15480542]

>>15479867
>Maybe Taiwan though.
Starship launching from that tiny island 2 miles off shore would be hilarious

[Anonymous No.15480543]

>>15480509
>idea man
yeah

[Anonymous No.15480544]

If they say NTP can get to mars in 45 days - 3 months how long would it take to get to Venus?

[Anonymous No.15480550]

>>15480543
Wow cool so many ideas

[Anonymous No.15480561]

>>15480544
Venus is so easy to get to with chemical rockets and aerobraking that NTP would actually be slower - you're not gonna aerobrake an LH2 tank against Venus's atmosphere even with magic TPS.

[Anonymous No.15480570]

>>15480544
It's a nonsensical thing to say. It makes exactly as much sense as "A diesel engine can get you to Chicago in two hours".

[Anonymous No.15480571]

>>15480539
>simple
>iPhone
NTA and his plan is retarded, but it's pretty common for 3d printing hobbyists to print components for 3d printers. theoretically you could send over all the hard stuff to manufacture in situ like pcbs and motors and build more manufacturing only whatever is easiest to make in situ.

[Anonymous No.15480573]

>>15480397
Its fun, but dumb. It has Starship orbital fueling depot but uses NASA's Space Shuttle. Also its got that dumb guy with the forced line "I'm an elon fan"

[Anonymous No.15480575]

>>15480571
Unfortunately one of those hard things is batteries with usable density.

[Anonymous No.15480580]

>>15480397
It's kind of a slasher movie with the Moon in the villain role. The characters will be running and think they're safe but then oh no it's the Moon looming over the hillside and it menaces them with its gravity.

[Anonymous No.15480583]

>>15480571
>theoretically you could send over all the hard stuff to manufacture in situ like pcbs and motors and build more manufacturing only whatever is easiest to make in situ
That's the obvious solution to building anything substantial in space, and will be the general blueprint for any serious Mars base. The other guy was talking about Von Neumann machines which are an entirely different beast.

[Anonymous No.15480593]

>>15480583
the first Von Neumann machines in space were Yuri Gagarin's gut biome

[Anonymous No.15480610]

>>15480583
On Earth the smallest Von Neumann machine is arguably two people.
On Mars the smallest we know to build is the 10 million tons of payload and million people it would take to make Mars self sustaining.
Any innovation in the space should be aimed at making that number go down.

[Anonymous No.15480619]

So that Elon Starship space just isnt gonna happen huh

[Anonymous No.15480621]

>>15480619
He did one just take it

[Anonymous No.15480647]

>>15480619
after the jfk space

[Anonymous No.15480657]

>>15480593
Yuri Gagarin's gut bacteria don't have autonomous propulsion in space, not Von Neumann probes

[Anonymous No.15480664]

>>15480610
we don't know that its 10 million tons and 1 million people, that is just a rough, easy order of magnitude that sounds good
or is it actually based on anything at all? even some napkin math? I don't recall Musk ever expanding on that
why 1mil and 10 mil tons and not say 10k people and 100k tons?
the more people and mass there are, the more likely its self-sustaining yes, but is that actually based on anything at all?

[Anonymous No.15480665]

Double F9 launch tomorrow, ~6 hrs apart from Florida.

[Anonymous No.15480667]

>>15480619
he is a busy shitposting

[Anonymous No.15480669]

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1665143503108677634

[5'10 245lbs mountain of a man No.15480673]

Ok... I want to be honest for once. I'm openly gay. I enjoy taking load after load at truck stop glory holes. I tell them right away... Tell them I'm a man. My serpentine body let's them not believe me. But I'm honest to spaceflight the entire time...

[Anonymous No.15480680]

this industry moves too damn slow

[Anonymous No.15480694]

https://twitter.com/SpaceAbhi/status/1664812688919400449

https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2022-2725

[Anonymous No.15480696]

>>15480680
it's not like building ships or making a new call of duty game is faster. Things take time

[Anonymous No.15480697]

>>15480694
> The SpaceX Crew and Cargo Dragon 2 spacecraft are each equipped with two drogue parachutes to stabilize the spacecraft following reentry and four main parachutes to further decelerate the spacecraft prior to splashdown in the ocean. This paper will discuss the development of the main parachutes. While the overall design and architecture of these parachutes remains similar to previous capsule recovery system designs, SpaceX ensured these parachutes are truly engineered to meet the standard of “human rating” by leveraging new techniques. These include: novel materials and fabrication methods, breakthrough design and analysis techniques, and a rigorous and rapid drop test campaign to achieve this higher standard. In August 2020, this main parachute development effort culminated in the first successful human return from orbit splashdown since the Apollo program. As part of the Demonstration-2 mission, Crew Dragon Endeavour, with astronauts Robert Behnken and Doug Hurley onboard, successfully descended into the Gulf of Mexico, off the coast of Pensacola, Florida. This paper will address topics such as utilization of higher strength to weight materials and enhanced understanding of the influence of material permeability. It will also discuss the development of instrumentation to measure dynamic loading within suspension lines during parachute drop testing; and the associated insight gained for what would have historically been referred to asymmetry load factors. The paper will also present a revised method for calculating and allocating design margin in parachute components. These include the use of A-basis material allowables that incorporate preconditioned materials, and non-uniaxially tested joints that better reflect in-flight loading conditions.

maybe someone with access could post the paper, I'm too lazy

[Anonymous No.15480698]

>>15480397
>Ten years later [...] (2021) Jo is now NASA's deputy director, launching a spacecraft on an SLS Block 1 rocket to investigate the abnormality.
i'm going to say no.

[Anonymous No.15480701]

>>15480698
>With help from her ex-husband General Doug Davidson, Air Force Chief of Staff, Jo requisitions the EMP and rescues retired Space Shuttle Endeavour from a museum to serve the new mission
it gets worse

[Anonymous No.15480706]

>>15480697
why didn't they just FUCKING use the Dracos to land

[Anonymous No.15480712]

god what a shitbox

[Anonymous No.15480713]

>>15480706
NASA wouldn't let them.

[Anonymous No.15480714]

>>15480706
“The reason we decided not to pursue (powered landings) heavily is it would have taken a tremendous amount of effort to qualify that for safety, particularly for crew transport,” Musk said. “And then there was a time when I thought that the Dragon approach to landing on Mars, where you’ve got a base heat shield and side-mounted thrusters, would be the right way to land on Mars, but now I’m pretty confident that is not the right way, and that there’s a far better approach.”

Musk did not elaborate on the new concept for landing on Mars.

“That’s what the next generation of SpaceX rockets and spacecraft is going to do, so just the difficulty of safely qualifying Dragon for propulsive landings, and the fact, from a technology evolution standpoint, it was no longer in line with what we were confident was the optimal way to land on Mars,” Musk said. “That’s why we’re not pursuing it.

article from 2017

[Anonymous No.15480720]

>>15480714
he's become less coherent over the years.
current elon would just talk about something tangential without answering the question

[Anonymous No.15480721]

>>15480706
https://twitter.com/SpaceAbhi/status/1665169790556868608

don't know, but apparently it wasn't NASA that forced them to use a parachute

[Anonymous No.15480722]

>>15480713
incorrect according to this guy>>15480721

[Anonymous No.15480723]

>>15480694
>not on scihub
sneed
>>15480712
mogged

[Anonymous No.15480726]

>>15480712
works for boots on the moon I guess

[Anonymous No.15480727]

>>15480726
was talking about the soviet one lol, LM is a queen

[Anonymous No.15480732]

>>15480720
what kind of article and readership is it?
when you get interviewed by some generalist thing (and even then there are differences in sophistication), most people won't understand or care about technical aspects
I don't think he has become less coherent, its just that its pointless to go into details like this if you are being interviewed by some run of the mill journalist
but yeah, even in the starship spaces he went on autopilot "im talking to retards" at points instead of going into details

[Anonymous No.15480734]

>>15480732
idk why i didn't just link it
https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/07/19/propulsive-landings-nixed-from-spacexs-dragon-spaceship/

[Anonymous No.15480742]

reminder that super heavy exploded from too low of a pressure at the raptor inlets due to the holes in it blowing up the engines because they weren't programmed to shut down because an FTS failure wasn't conceived of.

[Anonymous No.15480751]

>>15480742
it came to me in a vision

[Anonymous No.15480884]

>>15480328
the design is very human

[Anonymous No.15480885]

>>15480884
Humans design basically everything; "the design is very human" doesn't mean anything.

[Anonymous No.15480894]

>>15480742

I can’t wait for superheavy to dab on the haters by making to the moon with 2+ engines not even lit, though to be fair, it would also b just as lit for everything to work flawlessly, seeing all those engines glo img in unison would be straight out of Star Wars.

And if they land the booster, I’ll cum

[Anonymous No.15480900]

>>15480885
it's a joke about the chinese https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXX2ZVPz8Y8

[Anonymous No.15480908]

>>15480742
reminder that literally a quarter of the engines failed kek

[Anonymous No.15480914]

>>15480900
That's amazing. And horrifying. 9/10, I kek'd

[Anonymous No.15480917]

>the universe is our bitch and we will impregnate her with humans
-carl sagan

[Anonymous No.15480945]

>>15480701
>refurbishing shuttle from museum
oldspace is salivating right now, if spacex weren't around they'd be lobbying for this.

[Anonymous No.15480948]

>>15479720
russia is also planning to remain an actual country for the next 20 years but i doubt even that is possible for them at this point, losing the war will fracture their societal consciousness

[Anonymous No.15480969]

>>15480664
I know 100 000 people is a more scientific number to go for as it is based on avoiding inbreeding and having a healthy population that could continue to propagate without any outside interference

[Anonymous No.15480971]

>>15480722
I also recall Scott saying in a video that NASA said no?

[Anonymous No.15480995]

>>15480969
>100000 necessary to prevent inbreeding
jewish lie for diversity that only urbanites are stupid enough to believe.
How many animals are required to create a healthy population? You only need two.

[Anonymous No.15480999]

>>15480995
anon i...

[Anonymous No.15481002]

>>15480995
its not 100k, but its not 2 either I don't think at least on average
with inbreeding (breeding with close relatives) there is just a higher chance to get genetic diseases but I don't think its guaranteed
you would just have a shitload of non-viable children and even those that don't get auto-aborted might have diseases that affect them and their offspring in turn
the optimal was like second or third cousing or something like this for max fertility, closer than that and you start getting inbreeding problems, further away than that and you get outbreeding depression

> Inbreeding and outbreeding depression are a function of the distance between parents. Mating between close relatives (or near neighbors) may result in inbreeding depression, while the progeny of genetically distant parents (or organisms from different populations) may cause outbreeding depression.

with just 2 you would start to have inbreeding right away in the second generation, either between siblings or between parent-child
there is a reason its taboo, its just not a good idea

[Anonymous No.15481003]

>>15480999
it's true, of course lifespans will probably be shorter, and there will probably be strange results (like the blue skinned or hairy people in the appalachians) but it can be done. 100000 demoralizes space colonizers and tries to convince them that even if they do succeed the colony will be brown.
Historically many animals colonized far away islands with only two individuals and a high birth rate.

[Anonymous No.15481010]

https://phys.org/news/2018-03-populations-pair.html

> So let's do the maths. Fifty effective individuals – the IUCN standard for avoiding inbreeding – equals a total population of 250 to 500. This means that, in a hypothetical apocalypse, humanity would need a lot more than a handful of survivors to repopulate effectively.

> The idea that 50 individuals is enough to avoid inbreeding depression comes largely from laboratory populations that probably do not describe the situation for populations living in wild environments.

but with careful control and luck, maybe it could be possible? IVF a bunch of embryos, choose the ones that are genetic disease free and the ones that are most different from each other, the female would have a limited number of possible pregnancies they would be able to carry to term
people have on average 50% genes with their siblings, but this is just on average as you get a random assortment of chromosomes from both parents
theoretically you could have 0 chromosomes in common with your sibling

> Because they came from the same exact sperm and egg combination, they share the exact same DNA. The odds of siblings being “0%” related is extremely slim, estimated to be about one in ten million if you just consider the 23 chromosomes as is!

[Anonymous No.15481012]

>>15480995
Are you spanish royalty?

[Anonymous No.15481020]

>>15481003
not 100k but you might want 100 to 1000 people

[Anonymous No.15481021]

>>15481010
>The idea that 50 individuals is enough to avoid inbreeding depression comes largely from laboratory populations that probably do not describe the situation for populations living in wild environments.
completely disengenuous, anon look up dog breeding practices, you'll see that you can produce a viable (if VERY dysgenic) individual from EXTREME inbreeding. look up 'line-breeding' and examples of it, this kind of thing is practiced every day by people who work with animals, (especially dog breeders). There is no reason it couldn't work on people.

[Anonymous No.15481028]

>>15481020
probably, yeah. Honestly I agree that the more the better, but the idea that there is any lower limit other than two is stupid. Lab rats, for example, are bred sibling to sibling for AT LEAST 20 generations and are still functional and viable.

[Anonymous No.15481029]

>>15481021
if actually read what I said, i agree
controlling who breeds and how then there might be a chance to get a viable population even with 2, but you would have to be lucky and you would have to control it very strictly for multiple generations
what is usually meant by a viable population is the organisms just breeding normally (close to randomly)
and in any case, the 1 mil number (or 100k or whatever) is not due to that number being the minimum viable population "in the wild" but something closer to a independent civilization
is it possible that a colony of 100 people would survive and not go extinct if earth suddenly blinked out of existence? maybe, seems kind of unlikely though
how about 1 million people city?
I think its more about having enough people to have self-sustaining industry and so on to develop on its own just through economic etc incentives, big enough to support all the sub-industries that are needed for a fully self sustaining population

[Anonymous No.15481035]

>>15481028
a theoretical lower limit vs practical lower limit that doesn't need a lot off meddling or insane luck
the first one is not really that interesting if you want to look at what would be the minimum number of people for a self-sustaining civilization on mars

[Anonymous No.15481039]

>>15481035
you can replace luck and meddling with high birth rates. If enough children (dead or alive) are born you can push through the inbreeding depression.

[Anonymous No.15481041]

>>15481002
>between siblings
space-bro i'm stuck in the suitport!

[Anonymous No.15481042]

>>15481039
its not only about that, you need a lot of infrastructure to build all modern technology and people to run that infrastructure

[Anonymous No.15481044]

>>15481042
fair point

[Anonymous No.15481048]

>>15481042
Maybe you don't need all of modern infrastructure, or even much in the way of computers.

[Anonymous No.15481055]

Staging

>>15481053
>>15481053
>>15481053

[Anonymous No.15481058]

>>15481048
on mars?
I guess, sounds like a civilization with not a very long lifetime

[Anonymous No.15481064]

>>15481058
On Mars you need heavy industry, and lots of it. You don't need video cards.

[Anonymous No.15481073]

>>15481064
anons point is that you can't have low IQ (or disabled in some other way) inbreds running things, even for a short amount of time on as hostile an environment as mars. Maybe on some paradise island, not mars.

[Anonymous No.15481094]

>>15481073
A new class of aristocracy will arise, those charged by birthright and noble blood with the duty to venture outside the domes and brave the unforgiving surface.

[Anonymous No.15481291]

>>15480507
von Neumann probes and Dyson's stuff were thought experiments, not predictions

[Anonymous No.15481500]

>>15480610
t. never heard of cells

What's with all the retards lately (more than usual)?